Before Antonin Scalia’s body was cold, Mitch McConnell and other Republicans were screaming at President Obama, ordering him not to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court until after November’s election. They were panicked that he would nominate someone as extreme on the left as Scalia was on the right. Scalia politicized the Court more than any other justice in history.

McConnell promises to rebuke any nominee of the President by refusing to conduct confirmation hearings. McConnell’s plan was to make the Court dysfunctional until sometime in 2017.

Today, March 16, the President nominated Judge Merrick Garland, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He is respected by both Democrats and Republicans for his fair and impartial judgement.

Just last week Republican Senator Orin Hatch, the senior member of the Senate, praised Garland, calling him a “fine man who could fill the seat.” Then he said that Mr. Obama would not nominate him because it is an election year, and he would feel obligated to select a more liberal candidate.

If Garland is not given an opportunity to receive consideration for the Court, Republicans will be making several serious mistakes.

First of all, a survey revealed that the American people believe that the seat should be filled in order to allow the Court to function properly.

Secondly, it is obvious that this is a purely political move, and politics has become a four-letter word in 2016.

Third, they are gambling. Garland is a moderate on social issues. They are obviously betting on Trump or Cruz winning the November election and nominating a right wing extremist to the court. If they are incorrect, and polls claim that they are, Clinton or Sanders are far more likely to nominate a more progressive candidate.

Fourth, and finally, McConnell’s obstruction could cost his party seats in the Senate, and return its control to Democrats.

Through more than two centuries the Court has moved away from the intentions of our founding fathers. The third branch of our ‘check and balance’ system was created to guarantee that the other two branches and the states, did not pass legislation which directly opposed the Constitution. It was not supposed to part of our political system.

When the two parties acquired increased power, presidents discovered an opportunity to advance their party’s philosophies by nominating justices who supported those ideas and goals.

A perfect example was Scalia, who never decided in favor of the majority of the American people; he consistently ruled in favor of conservatives and the Republican point of view.

Garland would join Anthony Kennedy, who is often the deciding vote, supporting both conservatives and progressives without pledging allegiance to either. This should be what our Supreme Court was designed to accomplish; interpretation of the Constitution.

The best example of how the Court can fail the people and support special interest groups is ‘Citizens United.’

In January, 2010, SCOTUS upheld Citizens United. The right-wing dominated court declared that ‘corporations were people,’ and therefore could contribute unlimited funds to the campaign coffers of political candidates. In other words, the party of the wealthy could buy elections for those who would in turn support their desires.

Republicans must display an iota of intelligence for once in the last seven-plus years, and do the right thing. It would be delightful to see them do something; it’s been a very long time.

Op-Ed

By James Turnage

Source

Photo Courtesy of DonkeyHotey

Read ‘James Turnage’ on the free Amazon Kindle App