With the recent health struggles of liberal Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Democrats are nervously anticipating a possible battle with Senate Republicans over her replacement.
At the heart of the issue is the so-called Garland Rule, which Republicans used to block President Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland in 2016.
The rule holds that when the Senate and Presidency are held by opposing parties in an election year, the consideration of a nominee will be delayed until the voters have an opportunity to weigh in in the general election. But frantic Democrats are trying impose a self-serving interpretation of the rule on the Senate that makes it meaningless.
In essence, Democrats argue that the rule is that no nominee will be considered in the year before a presidential election – even if the Senate and the President come from the same party. This would obviously prevent Trump from nominating anyone to replace Ginsburg if she was forced to step down.
The Law and Crime blog notes:
Ed Whelan, a prominent figure in the conservative judicial activism movement, offered a likely preview of Republican strategy in the event that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passes away during the 2020 presidential election. In short: Whelan argued that Senate Republicans would quickly move to fill any empty seat.
…“Funny how Left (1) concocts claim that Biden rule applies in election years when president and Senate are of *same* party, and (2) forgets its own 2016 argument (bonkers, to be sure) that Senate is constitutionally obligated to hold an up-or-down vote on a #SCOTUS nominee,” Whelan later added.
The left has never had any scruples when it comes to winning. The difference now is that Republicans have learned how to fight, and no amount of whining by the Democrats will change that.
Read the full story here.
No comments: