SCOTUS Brief 4/22/2016
NY Times: Sen. Hoeven opposes Garland because of his liberal record – Washington Times: Reagan AG Edwin Meese warns Senate against confirming Garland – Sen. Toomey in the Standard Journal (PA): I oppose Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court
To keep up with conservative & legal experts on Twitter follow:
- The New York Times’ Emmarie Huetteman writes Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) met with Merrick Garland on Thursday and stated his opposition to Garland’s confirmation because of his liberal views on the Second Amendment and federal regulations.
NY Times: John Hoeven, G.O.P. Senator, Meets With Merrick Garland but Strongly Opposes Him
“Mr. Hoeven said he would not support Judge Garland, who is the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, because he had not alleviated his discomfort about his perspective on gun rights and federal regulations that would affect those working in farming, ranching and energy sectors. ‘Ultimately, I must do what’s best for our state, and based on his judicial record and our meeting today, I believe Judge Garland will make decisions counter to North Dakota’s interests and I cannot support his confirmation,’ Mr. Hoeven said in a statement. Mr. Hoeven, who has said from the beginning that he would not support President Obama’s nominee, did not repeat the argument that the voters should have a chance to weigh in on who chooses Justice Antonin Scalia’s replacement on the bench, as many Republicans have done. Rather he took the striking step of expressing opposition to Judge Garland himself.”
- The Washington Times’ David Sherfinski writes Edwin Meese, former Attorney General to President Ronald Reagan, is warning the Senate not to confirm Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court because of his views on the Constitution.
Washington Times: Edwin Meese, former AG under Reagan, warns against confirming Garland
“Edwin Meese, who served as attorney general under President Ronald Reagan, is warning of potentially far-reaching consequences if the U.S. Senate confirms Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. ‘Probably no president in modern history has trashed the Constitution by executive actions as this president,’ Mr. Meese said in an interview with reporter Ginny Simone. ‘And so to allow Obama, in his last year in office, to put another judge on the court, in other words to pack the court with people who don’t believe in the Constitution and who would not follow the Constitution, I think would be wrong for the Constitution and wrong for the country.’”
- In an op-ed for the Standard Journal in Pennsylvania, Sen. Pat Toomey writes he opposes Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court because of concerns about his views on executive power.
Sen. Toomey in the Standard Journal (PA): Toomey outlines opposition to Garland
“That brings us to the present nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. I met with Judge Garland for over an hour last week. He is a pleasant man with impressive legal training and experience. Two factors, however, weigh heavily against his confirmation. First, the balance of the Supreme Court is at stake, and we have an election right around the corner. With lifetime tenure, the next justice will determine the court’s balance for a generation. In that light, I believe it is sensible to allow the American people to participate in the choice of Justice Scalia’s successor less than seven months from now. Second, areas of Judge Garland’s record give me pause. Under our Constitution’s system of checks and balances, federal courts play an essential role in limiting executive abuses of power…But Judge Garland’s record raises serious doubts that he would serve as an adequate, independent legal check on the EPA and other federal agencies. Garland has ruled on dozens of cases involving challenges to new EPA regulations, and has sided with the agency over 90 percent of the time.”
