GOP won't budge on Garland hearings

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the U.S. Supreme Court today, but the announcement changed nothing for the Republican-controlled Senate, which has no intention of ever allowing him to reach the bench.

“Everyone knows this president won’t be filling the current vacancy,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “He’s constitutionally empowered to make the nomination. [But] the Senate holds the constitutional power to withhold consent, as we will.”

With the 2016 presidential election fast approaching, Obama and Senate Democrats want to fill the seat vacated by the late Justice Antonin Scalia as soon as possible. Democrats argue the Senate has a constitutional duty to deliberate Garland’s nomination. But Republicans are adamant they will not even entertain the idea of a new Supreme Court justice until after the election, fearing a liberal monopoly of America’s judicial branch.

“I have fulfilled my constitutional duty, now it is time for the Senate to do theirs,” Obama said as he announced Garland’s nomination in the White House Rose Garden. “Presidents don’t stop working in the final year of their term. Neither should a senator.”

Obama said he spent the last month meeting with each member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and other top advisers to make his decision. He praised Garland as one of the nation’s top legal minds and urged Republicans to give him a fair shot.

But according to legal experts, there is no historical precedent, or even an ethical obligation, for the Senate to vote on Garland during an election year.

“The Senate’s constitutional role is to advise and consent—part of that process is often not considering a nominee at all,” said Carrie Severino, chief counsel and policy director for the Judicial Crisis Network. “The Senate is doing exactly what they were elected to do and that is to be a check on the president.”

The current situation is extremely rare, according to Severino. The next Supreme Court justice will be the 113th in U.S. history. Only 160 nominations have ever been submitted to the Senate. Of those, 25 did not get a vote. And no historical cases parallel this court’s exact circumstances.

It did not take long for Senate Republicans to coalesce around blocking the eventual nominee. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., released a statement within hours of Scalia’s death saying the American people should have a voice in choosing his replacement by electing the next president.

Republicans hold a 54-46 Senate majority. For Garland to get confirmed, Obama would have to sway 14 Republican senators to break an inevitable filibuster. Democrats would then need at least five from the other side to vote with them for a confirmation. That’s an unlikely scenario, especially with Senate leaders such as McConnell and Grassley openly refusing to participate.

Scalia’s passing left a large void on the court, and conservatives believe the next justice could shift the court to the left for a generation. For years, the court had an even four-to-four split, with Justice Anthony Kennedy the swing vote. A new liberal justice would give a fifth vote to further a progressive agenda.

“Imagine a court where those four liberal votes did not have to moderate themselves at all to try to get Justice Kennedy’s vote,” Severino said. “They could simply run the table on a laundry list of liberal special interests.”

Obama said Garland will travel to Capitol Hill on Thursday to begin meeting with senators individually. Several Republicans said they are open to meeting with Garland, while maintaining he has no chance of getting a hearing.

But minority members insist Republicans are abusing their power. The Senate Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat called out McConnell and Grassley on the Senate floor.

“The Republican members met behind closed doors to unilaterally decide … to refuse to consider any nominee this year,” said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. “It’s a dereliction of our constitutional duty.”

Conservatives called Leahy’s remarks empty rhetoric and praised Senate Republicans for sticking to their guns.

“The Obama administration has demonstrated it cannot be trusted to respect the rule of law, the Constitution, and the limits of its own authority,” said Casey Mattox, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom. “The Senate majority is wise to exercise its authority to not hold hearings.”