The Dem’s Leading Senator Makes Mockery Of Constitution, Refuses To Even Meet With Trump’s SC Nominee, Despite Urging Senate To Vote On Garland
[Opinion] Churlish Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is attempting to delegitimize President Trump’s choice of judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace deceased Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
In a hissy fit, Schumer has announced he won’t meet with Judge Barrett, something that is a standard part of the nominating process. But, these are not normal times.
I am not going to meet with Judge Barrett. Why would I meet with a nominee of such an illegitimate process and one who is determined to get rid of the Affordable Care Act?https://t.co/7v4ES3HNM1
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) September 29, 2020
Sen. Schumer somehow seems to have convinced himself that the vacant Supreme Court seat actually belonged to Justice Ginsburg and that her final wish to have another president appoint her successor somehow is legitimate.
We all realize that she held that seat for what seemed like an eternity, but the seat belongs to the American people. Ginsburg, herself, acknowledged that following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, an ideological opposite but reportedly a good friend of hers.
Justice Ginsburg made her responsibility clear after her colleague, Justice Antonin Scalia’s, sudden passing had created a vacancy on the high court in 2016, in another election year…
Then-President Barack Obama advanced the name of Merrick Garland to fill the seat
(The New York Times) Asked if the Senate had an obligation to assess Judge Garland’s qualifications, her answer was immediate.
“That’s their job,” she said. “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year.”
Schumer can protest all he wants but there’s nothing delegitimate about what’s unfolding right now. Yahoo News explains there’s significant examples of historical precedence…
(Yahoo News) Twenty-nine times in American history there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential election year…
… In short: There have been ten vacancies resulting in a presidential election-year or post-election nomination when the president and Senate were from opposite parties… Only one of those, Chief Justice Melville Fuller’s nomination by Grover Cleveland in 1888, was confirmed before the election…
… The norm in these cases strongly favored holding the seat open for the conflict between the two branches to be resolved by the presidential election. That is what Republicans did in 2016. The voters had created divided government, and the Senate was within its historical rights to insist on an intervening election to decide the power struggle. Had there been no conflict between the branches to submit to the voters for resolution, there would have been no reason for delay…
… So what does history say about this situation, where a president is in his last year in office, his party controls the Senate, and the branches are not in conflict? Once again, historical practice and tradition provides a clear and definitive answer: In the absence of divided government, election-year nominees get confirmed.
Minority Leader Schumer and his party are powerless to do anything except conduct a Kavanaugh shit show as Republicans move the future Justice Barrett’s confirmation through the Senate.
The fact is Sen. Schumer has only the recently deceased Justice Ginsburg to blame.
Justice Ginsburg had a history of cancers. The justice had colon cancer in 1999 and pancreatic cancer in 2009. After her lung cancer was diagnosed, the odds favored that her lung nodules represented metastases from her other cancers rather than a third new cancer originating in her lungs.
If Justice Ginsburg was so determined to have the seat she occupied be filled by an ideological sister, she should have retired from the court while Barack Obama was president.
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) March 16, 2016
Following Schumer’s own logic, Schumer should be telling his fellow Senators to ‘DoYourJob.’