Reaction to Garland nomination falls along party lines
With President Obama nominating a federal judge for the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday, the hypothetical confrontation between the White House and Senate Republicans became reality and neither of Pennsylvania’s senators was changing their minds.
“With the U.S. Supreme Court’s balance at stake, and with the presidential election fewer than eight months away, it is wise to give the Amer-ican people a more direct voice in the selection and confirmation of the next justice,” said U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who has come under fire for saying the GOP-controlled Senate should not consider any nominee offered by Obama but wait for the next president.
Obama nominated U.S. Appellate Court Judge Merrick Garland, who is described as a well-respected moderate jurist, to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, but Toomey was not swayed.
“Should Merrick Garland be nominated again by the next president,” Toomey said, “I would be happy to carefully consider his nomination, as I have done with dozens of judges submitted by President Obama.”
U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, continued to pressure Toomey, without naming him, and other Senate Republicans to give Garland, an appeals court judge, “a fair hearing and a timely vote” much like he did on Tuesday in a conference call with reporters.
“Chief Judge Merrick Garland is an eminently qualified nominee for the Supreme Court who has established a record of fairness, integrity and legal excellence over many years. I look forward to reviewing Judge Garland’s record and giving his nomination the full consideration it deserves,” Casey said.
“The president has done his job as is proscribed under the Constitution, and it’s time for Senate Republicans to commit to doing their job by giving this nominee a fair hearing and a timely vote,” said Casey.
As he did Tuesday, Casey blasted those Republicans who have engaged in “outrageous political games” such as refusing to even meet with a nominee.
Casey also targeted the argument that the Senate has not traditionally voted on a nominee in an election year. “The history is also clear,” he said. “The Senate has taken action on every Supreme Court nominee in the last 100 years, regardless of whether the nomination was made in a presidential election year, and not since the Civil War has the Senate taken longer than a year to fill a Supreme Court vacancy.”
Republican House lawmakers from southwest Pennsylvania expectedly supported their Senate colleagues.
“President Obama’s unprecedented unconstitutional actions since his re-election have poisoned the well for this appointment and forfeited its legitimacy,” said U.S. Rep. Keith Rothfus, R-Sewickley. “Under the system of checks and balances our framers built, the Senate should not allow the president to now pick the jury that may be asked to judge his actions. We should let the American people decide the direction of the Court.”
U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair Township, said it comes down to Obama simply not having the necessary support in the Senate.
“Fascinating how the president has suddenly transformed into a strict constitutional originalist when he puts forth a nominee for advice and consent of the Senate. He has a right to nominate whomever he sees fit, but if the votes aren’t there, then the votes aren’t there,” Murphy said.
“What is important in this process is to keep in mind that this nominee will replace Justice Scalia, one of the greatest jurists to have sat on the Supreme Court, known among all else by his commitment to the original intent of the Constitution, and we should never be afraid of allowing the Constitution to work as originally framed by our founders,” Murphy said.
U.S. Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Hollidaysburg, Blair County, said “the Senate has every right under the Constitution to confirm or not confirm a nominee for the Supreme Court, and I commend my Republican colleagues for working to ensure that the American people’s voices are heard in who will potentially be our next Supreme Court justice.”
Casey was not the only Democrat keeping the pressure on Toomey, who faces a re-election bid this year. State Democratic officials held a joint call after Obama’s announcement and had Toomey clearly in their sights.
“Republicans like Sen. Toomey have made a decision that they apparently think that the president’s term in office is already over, despite more than 10 months left on the clock,” said Marcel Groen, the chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, “or that somehow the American people didn’t speak twice — in 2008 and 2012 — to elect this president to carry out his constitutional duties.”
Pennsylvania Auditor General Eugene DePasquale praised the selection of Garland and lamented the prospect of a Supreme Court seat being left vacant for a year or more.
“The idea that (Republicans) are going to do nothing and let the court sit vacant is absolutely stunning, especially when these political games are creating confusion in the courts for a year because you have different circuit opinions that are out there on critical cases that the Supreme Court needs to hear and weigh in on,” DePasquale said. “The Supreme Court can’t fully do their job until Sen. Toomey does his.”