Republicans Deny Fair Hearing to SCOTUS Nominee

After Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, announced in advance that they wouldn't hold hearings or hold a vote on any of Pres. Obama's nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court after Justice Antonin Scalia died in February, it was clear that any nominee would have a tough fight to be heard, much less confirmed.

I felt sorry for Judge Merrick Garland when Pres. Obama introduced him in the Rose Garden at the White House. He seems to be such a humble, decent man. He comes from a modest home, graduated as valedictorian of his high school class, and worked his way through Harvard. He stocked shoes in a shoe store and sold his comic book collection because he needed the money. He graduated summa cum laude from Harvard University and magna cum laude from Harvard Law School.

I felt even worse when Judge Garland teared up and said how much the nomination meant to him. Garland is the principled prosecutor who brought the Oklahoma City Federal Building bombers to justice. He oversaw the process from beginning to end. He refused to take evidence people offered to him without a subpoena so there’d be no chance that the bombers would get off on a technicality at trial.

He is respected by both parties. Some time ago Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah gave a speech extolling his virtues before the Senate became the partisan, dysfunctional place that it is now.

Today Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican Majority Leader, reiterated his stance that he will not consider, meet with, or hold hearings for any nominee that Pres. Obama might propose, including Merrick Garland.

“It’s not the person,” McConnell said. “It’s the principle.”

The principle seems to be that the president has no authority to nominate a Supreme Court justice in his final year of office.

I think there’s a chance that Merrick Garland will be confirmed this year. If Hillary Clinton is elected president of the United States in November 2016 and Republicans realize that she could nominate a more liberal justice in her early 40s come January 2017 or renominate Merrick Garland, Republicans might act to hold hearings, have an up or down vote on the nominee before them, which is the job the Constitution describes as their duty.

The Senate is going on a two-week recess tomorrow. One wonders whether they deserve to collect the pay they get whether they do their job or not.