SCOTUS Brief 4/28/2016
Bloomberg: Obama’s Push for Court Pick Fizzles as Republicans Stand Firm – NY Times: After Joint Meeting with Garland, Oklahoma Sens. Inhofe & Lankford Oppose Hearings & a Vote – Weekly Standard: Senator Orrin Hatch on Scalia, His Successor, Obama, and the Senate
To keep up with conservative & legal experts on Twitter follow:
- Bloomberg’s Mike Dorning and Tim Higgins notice that pro-Garland ad dollars are drying up, and even former Harry Reid senior adviser Jim Manley concedes no one expects a hearing or a vote before November.
Bloomberg: Obama’s Push for Court Pick Fizzles as Republicans Stand Firm
“A media blitz by the White House and its allies has failed to crack Republican opposition to President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, and it is all but certain the seat will remain vacant until after U.S. elections in November. Television ad spending to support the nominee, appeals court judge Merrick Garland, has plummeted in the last two weeks, an indication the dispute is losing traction with the public. While 14 Republican senators have met privately with Garland, just two support a public hearing on his nomination. The Senate majority leader, Kentucky Republican Mitch McConnell, remains adamant that the next president, not Obama, will fill the court vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February. Democrats and their allies ‘are going to continue their messaging and continue to extract their pound of flesh, but I don’t think anyone expects it to happen this year before the election,’ said Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.”
- The New York Times’ Emmarie Huetteman writes that Oklahoma Senators Jim Inhofe and James Lankford joined South Dakota Senator Mike Rounds in standing against a hearing and a vote on the Supreme Court nomination after meeting with Merrick Garland yesterday.
NY Times: James Inhofe, Once a Merrick Garland Backer, Remains Opposed to His Nomination
“While White House officials had certainly hoped that the meeting could highlight the pinnacle of Judge Garland’s time in the public eye, Mr. Inhofe and Mr. Lankford made it clear that they opposed his nomination to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February. ‘The Senate’s constitutional role of ‘advice and consent’ includes the ability to choose the right time and determine if the nominee is the right person,’ they said in a statement. ‘Well before the president nominated Judge Garland, the majority of the members of the Senate determined that a presidential election year is not the right time to start a nomination process for the Supreme Court.’ In an unusual joint meeting that lasted almost 55 minutes, Mr. Inhofe and Mr. Lankford said they thanked Judge Garland for what he did for their state during a painful time. ‘During our time with Judge Garland, we extended Oklahoma’s gratitude for the many weeks he spent in our state working for justice for those who lost loved ones from the Oklahoma City bombing,’ they said.”
- In an interview with the Weekly Standard’s Terry Eastland, former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch says the people should have a say in their next Supreme Court Justice with their votes in the fall elections.
Weekly Standard: Scalia, His Successor, Obama, and the Senate
“Utah senator Orrin Hatch has contended in numerous speeches, op-eds, press releases, and television appearances that the Senate should not act this year to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court that resulted when Justice Antonin Scalia died on February 13. Instead, says Hatch, the Senate should wait until after the next president takes office and take up the nomination he—or she—then would make. Among Republican senators, Hatch has been the most vocal in arguing for this position. In an interview, we talked about Scalia, his successor, Obama, and more. I asked Hatch whether, prior to Scalia’s death, he and his Republican colleagues had thought about the possibility that a vacancy (created by any justice’s departure from the Court) might occur in 2016, an election year and of course the last of Obama’s two-term presidency. ‘We were concerned’ that there might be a vacancy, he said, ‘but I can’t say we were prepared for one.’ Even so, when Scalia died, they quickly agreed (with few dissents) not to take up any nomination Obama might send to the Senate, thus leaving the matter of filling Scalia’s seat until 2017.”
