It’s only right that President Trump nominate a justice replacement. It is imperative that the president nominate a justice to replace Ruth Bader Ginsberg. It is with complete precedent that Trump follow his constitutional mandate.
Twenty-nine times before in history has a supreme court vacancy occurred in an election year. Twenty-nine times before the President nominated a judicial appointment.
Every. Single. Time.
The last time this happened, it was Barack Hussein Obama. He nominated Merrick Garland, but that nomination failed because his party didn’t control the Senate.
Nineteen times in our history, the President in his final year did control the Senate and seventeen times, his nominee was confirmed. Ten times, the President and the Senate were not of the same party and only two times the president got his nominee passed through to the highest court.
It is a matter of policy, checks and balances. If you are not in control of the Senate, you do not get your nominees confirmed very often as Obama found out. The people are in control and make the decisions.
As Obama liked to remind Americans after he came to power, “Elections have consequences.”
Yes, Mr. former president…. yes, they do.
Trump is our president now, and he has every right to nominate a justice to replace the notorious RBG. The republican senators have the right to confirm her before the election, and they have the right to do so without hearings.
Yes, I said it…WITHOUT hearings.
Hearings are a complimentary process that is not mentioned in the constitution. The constitution only requires the Senate vote and confirm. There is no requirement for questioning and a firing squad that we have seen the last few decades. Much like Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and most recently, Brett Kavanaugh, conservative nominees have routinely been viciously attacked. The liberal process of attacking nominees has even been turned into an approved verb — to be Borked, after nominee Bork was so terribly maligned that he eventually caved to the pressure and removed his name from contention.
President Trump has already signaled he will choose a woman to fill the position in deference to Justice Ginsburg. It will either be Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lagoa.
Democrats should appreciate the nomination of a woman and in Lagoa’s case, a Latina, but I doubt that will matter in the least. I predict both will be savagely attacked and brutalized by the party of compassion and equality.
Much like in 2016, the election of Donald Trump had a lot to do with the direction of the courts and he promised to appoint originalist conservatives to the high court.
He did . . . twice.
Now, 2020 is a referendum on that opportunity again.
I suspect Americans will have the same opinion when heading to the ballot box (or mailbox) this time as well.