The hottest topics of the week seem to be whether or not Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia should be replaced by Pres. Obama or how Taylor Swift finally let Kanye finally have it at the Grammys. Since I prefer to focus on the supposed positive, let’s take a look at the court.
Justice Scalia passed away Saturday morning. The politics started that afternoon. (You may have just heard me sigh.) The question raised is whether Scalia’s seat should be filled by a nominee chosen by the sitting president or if the person elected in the November of 2016 elections should instead hold that responsibility.
First, some background…
Article II Section 2 includes the following: “He [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law.”
There is nothing that usurps the responsibility Pres. Obama currently holds to propose a nominee.
However, multiple Republicans have averred that Obama should not make such a proposal. Most notably, Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said: “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”
Immediately there were claims of obstructionism.
Next, a problem…
In the summer of 2007, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) spoke to the left-leaning American Constitution Society. Note that at the time, Pres. George W. Bush had a year and a half left in his term. Schumer said: “We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court, except in extraordinary circumstances. They must prove by actions not words that they are in the mainstream rather than we have to prove that they are not… I will do everything in my power to prevent one more ideological ally on the court.”
Note that Schumer’s vow was met with significant applause.
Hence, my conclusion…
Obstructionism occurs by both parties, but outrage is only claimed, feigned, and encouraged when it’s happening by someone else. Also, claims of obstructionism seem utilized most in attempts to turn the public against the so-called obstructionists. Sometimes it works. [Did you hear another sigh?]
Charles Lipson, the well respected, moderate Professor of Political Science and founder and director of the Program on International Politics, Economics and Security at the University of Chicago, has concisely positioned what’s happening like this:
No. 1: No nominee for the high court can get through the Senate before the election. No one.
No. 2: President Obama and the Democratic candidates for president know that. So do Republicans. All God’s children know it.
No. 3: Since the nominee will not be approved, Obama will use the opportunity to advance other goals. He will propose someone who burnishes his own progressive credentials and shows why control of the court depends on the November election. Putting Senate Republicans in an awkward position would be a nice bonus. But the target is November.
No. 4: Obama will nominate someone whose demographic characteristics help in the contests for president and U.S. Senate. That is not just his main criterion. It is his only one. The candidate could be from a purple state. Or a Latino. Or openly gay. Having finished law school would be a plus.
No. 5: The proposed candidate will not receive a Senate vote before the election or in the lame-duck session. If Mitch McConnell even considered it, he would become the former majority leader.
No. 6: Democrats and Republicans will both use the issue to show voters why it is crucial to elect them — and not the other party. Democrats will add that this again shows we have a “do nothing” Congress. Republicans will say it shows we have “do too much” judges.
No. 7: All the rest is political theater, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Political theater… signifying nothing. Ok, I’ve changed my mind… maybe we should go back to talking about Taylor Swift and Kanye.
Respectfully…
AR