Type to search

SCOTUS: Senate Democrats Will Try To Force A Vote

Campaign 2016 Elections Headlines National News Politics

SCOTUS: Senate Democrats Will Try To Force A Vote

Share
Harry Reid Senate Minority Leader scorched James Comey in letter, October 30, 2016

Senate Democrats may attempt to force a vote on a new pick for SCOTUS, according to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.

Mitch McConnell, GOP leader of the Senate, has so far blatantly refused calls for hearings on President Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. According to McConnell, whomever wins the presidential election this year should choose the next SCOTUS justice — a contrast from decades of precedent.

In a conference call, Reid said some Republican senators — including some of those facing difficult re-election battles — would like to distance themselves from Donald Trump, the party’s nominee. Senate Dems plan to reach out to those Republicans in attempting to schedule a vote on Garland.

“We have a couple of options and we are deciding when to do that. And if we should do that. When and if,” Reid said.

Reid believes more moderate Senate Republicans should put pressure on McConnell to confirm Garland, rather than allow the possibility of a Trump pick to the Supreme Court.

“They spend a lot of time these Republicans, spending a lot of energy trying to separate themselves from Donald Trump. But as long as they’re holding a Supreme Court seat open for him, they’re his minions. They’re his enablers.”

“We’re going to ensure that every American knows that as long as Senate Republicans are fighting to let Trump shape the Supreme Court for a generation or more, there’s no daylight between them and Trump,” Reid concluded.

Photo: Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) speaks at a Democratic fundraising dinner featuring all three Democratic presidential candidates in Las Vegas, Nevada, January 6, 2016.  REUTERS/Rick Wilking 

Tags:

6 Comments

  1. Daniel Jones August 11, 2016

    The only reason the remaining Republican support exists is naked ambition–they hope to Rove in operatives to make decisions and place people into the system–including the Supreme Court.

    Reply
  2. Lynda Groom August 11, 2016

    Good luck trying to get the leader of the Senate to accomplish anything of value. Come November maybe reality will set in…maybe!!!

    Reply
  3. Insinnergy August 12, 2016

    Its very amusing to watch the “Party of the Constitution” ignore the Constitution for political gain by not holding hearings on a replacement for a strict Constitutionalist judge.

    Can the irony get any thicker?

    Now any mention of the “sacred” nature of the Second Amendment by the absurdly hypocritical GOP just makes me giggle.

    Reply
    1. TZToronto August 12, 2016

      The great irony would be if, when HRC wins the Presidency and the Senate goes Democratic, the Republicans, between November 9 and the new Senate taking their seats, decide to change their minds and try to confirm Garland. President Obama would be in a position to say, “I think I’ll let President-Elect Clinton make the nomination. I withdraw my nomination of Justice Garland.” Then you’ll hear the ironic wails from McConnell, et al., that it’s the President’s duty to make a Supreme Court nomination, ignoring the fact that he’d already made his nomination and they themselves refused to act on it. I just hope it happens.

      1. ralphkr August 12, 2016

        I still say that President Obama made a grave error in not appointing a flaming liberal to temporarily hold the SCOTUS seat until a permanent replacement was approved by the Senate. Bear in mind that a temp appt would be in effect until the term of office expired (lifetime in the case of SCOTUS) or until a permanent replacement was consented to and installed. We would have seen the Republican Senate fall all over themselves immediately consenting to Garland as a permanent SCOTUS.

  4. Jon August 12, 2016

    The Constitution requires the Senate to advise and consent on Presidential nominees. No where does it say that all vacancies shall remain vacant until a new President is elected. Mitch McConnell and Charles Grassley are clearly violating both the letter and spirit of the Constitution. They must be held to answer for their violation of the supreme law of the land. If Hillary Clinton is elected, their logic would compel the Republican Guard in the Senate to postpone a hearing on a Presidential nominee until after the 2020 election. If they are not happy with the President elected in 2020, they will postpone a hearing on the Presidential nominee until after the 2024 election. ad infinitum

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.