Joe Carbonari
President Obama has nominated Merrick Garland to fill the vacant U. S. Supreme Court seat. The U.S. Senate must confirm the nomination for it to take effect. The current court is ideologically divided as is the country. It is generally agreed that if Garland is confirmed the court’s balance, which has leaned conservative for the past few decades, will tilt in a more moderate-to-liberal direction.
To prevent that, Republican Senate leadership has determined not to move forward with the confirmation process. Their hope is that the political scene will change after this year’s presidential election, that they will win, and that someone more favorable to them will be appointed by the new Republican president. Donald Trump, most likely.
This same delay or destroy approach has brought us the political gridlock that has so poorly served us in the recent years and has led to our slow, unbalanced economic recovery and the disillusionment and dissatisfaction that has built the Trump movement. It is more of the same.
Trump is a wild card. Who he might nominate, and what the results might be, is problematic and un-nerving to many.
Should Hillary Clinton win the presidency, her nomination might well be more partisan than Merrick Garland. To avoid that, the Republicans might well re-start his confirmation process and seat him prior to Hillary’s swearing in. That would make some sense. Let us hope that good sense prevails.
Tim Baldwin
With Justice Scalia’s death, President Obama has appointed Merrick Garland, a Harvard graduate and D.C. Circuit judge. This being a highly-controversial election year, the stakes are higher with this appointment.
Analysts say if Republicans don’t confirm the appointment, it will disenfranchise many because it will be viewed as a move for the Republican Party. Others say that Republicans should confirm Garland for fear that if Hillary Clinton is elected, she will appoint a justice more liberal than Garland.
Ted Cruz is capitalizing on this because he has Supreme Court litigation experience with much knowledge in jurisprudence. Rumor has it that Trump, who considers himself his most trusted advisor, would likely appoint his sister, Third Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Maryanne Trump Barry.
The Constitution has been interpreted differently since before its ratification. The Anti-Federalists deemed it a great source of potential evil. The Federalists deemed it a necessary evil. Since then, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution on thousands of legal issues, which is deemed a final arbitration of those issues; and in some ways, it (like society itself) has changed over time.
Americans seemingly pay little attention to our power over Supreme Court rulings. Under Article V, USC, we can change the course of undesirable or erroneous constitutional decisions. Yes, Supreme Courts are necessary to determine issues under the Constitution, but their decisions are binding so long as the people allow them to be.