Congressional Larceny

McConnell defends blocking Merrick Garland. Says move was consistent with the history of the Senate. The only problem is that it's inconsistent with the constitution of the United States which states "He shall hold his office during the term of four years"...," Not 3 years. The term lasts 4 years and during that time if a vacancy comes up on the Supreme Court, it's his right under the constitution to choose a successor. McConnell is simply looking for any possible way of justifying what he did which was to steal the seat that should have been Obama's to fill with his pick, which was Merrick Garland. And how the Democrats allowed McConnell to get away with that is a mind blowing example of political ineptitude.

The history or tradition of the Senate has NOTHING to do with this. Their traditions and history don't concern the executive branch and they cannot obstruct the executive branch from doing it's rightful task of filling a position on the court. Whatever traditions the Senate follows have nothing to do with the other branches of government. They can have a tradition of collectively, as a body, picking their nose on the first Monday of every month if that's what suits them, but the White House doesn't have to concern itself with that tradition nor can that tradition be imposed on the Executive branch of government to stop it from doing it's constitutional duty.

There are a lot of things they could have done and didn't. They could have filed a suit in Federal Court and taken the argument to the Supreme Court ( which was 4 to 4 at the time) and that would have put pressure on the court to make a call that the entire country would scrutinize including the media and every legal scholar in the country. I doubt the SCOTUS would have seen McConnell's argument as having any legal basis, because it didn't. Tradition in the Senate doesn't Trump the US Constitution and the Executive Branch is not bound by the Traditions of the Senate.. You don't need a law degree to know that. The last thing Roberts would want is for his SCOTUS to be viewed throughout history as the court that allowed a sitting president to be denied his choice to fill a seat on Roberts court. The political pressure would have been overwhelming. They should have taken the issue to the Supreme Court and force them to make a call that would be historic and referenced throughout our future. Generations would look back on that decision that would shape the future of the country and stand out like the famous decisions; Dredd Scott, Brown v Board of Education, Roe v Wade, Citizens United. Force the court to decide the matter. Do you really think that Roberts would want to be seen historically as the guy that allowed his tenure to be politicized forever? Failing that, the Dems could have walked out of congress in protest. They could have fought and they didn't do anything.

Comments