~ Where the Sun Will Never Set on Our liberty ~
This National Review column was written 6 weeks ago. Prescient, to say the least!
Choosing not to fill a vacancy would be a historically unprecedented act of unilateral disarmament.
If a Supreme Court vacancy opens up between now and the end of the year, Republicans should fill it. Given the vital importance of the Court to rank-and-file Republican voters and grassroots activists, particularly in the five-decade-long quest to overturn Roe v. Wade, it would be political suicide for Republicans to refrain from filling a vacancy unless some law or important traditional norm was against them. There is no such law and no such norm; those are all on their side. Choosing not to fill a vacancy would be a historically unprecedented act of unilateral disarmament. It has never happened once in all of American history. There is no chance that the Democrats, in the same position, would ever reciprocate, as their own history illustrates.
Power, Norms, and Election-Year Nominations
There are two types of rules in Washington: laws that allocate power, and norms that reflect how power has traditionally, historically been used. Laws that allocate power are paramount, and particularly dangerous to violate, but there is no such law at issue here. A president can always make a nomination for a Supreme Court vacancy, no matter how late in his term or how many times he has been turned down; the only thing in his way is the Senate.
Twenty-nine times in American history there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential election year, or in a lame-duck session before the next presidential inauguration. (This counts vacancies created by new seats on the Court, but not vacancies for which there was a nomination already pending when the year began, such as happened in 1835–36 and 1987–88.) The president made a nomination in all twenty-nine cases. George Washington did it three times. John Adams did it. Thomas Jefferson did it. Abraham Lincoln did it. Ulysses S. Grant did it. Franklin D. Roosevelt did it. Dwight Eisenhower did it. Barack Obama, of course, did it. Twenty-two of the 44 men to hold the office faced this situation, and all twenty-two made the decision to send up a nomination, whether or not they had the votes in the Senate.
During the 1844 election, for example, there were two open seats on the Court. John Tyler made nine separate nominations of five different candidates, in one case sending up the same nominee three times. He sent up a pair of nominees in December, after the election. When those failed, he sent up another pair in February (presidential terms then ended in March). He had that power. Presidents have made Supreme Court nominations as late as literally the last day of their term. In Tyler’s case, the Whig-controlled Senate had, and used, its power to block multiple nominations by a man they had previously expelled from their party.
Worth reading the whole thing from the link. It includes some charts to prove the points!
I absolutely love Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court! She is a brilliant woman and a perfect pick!
Trump nominates Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court
President Donald Trump on Saturday announced his nomination to fill the U.S. Supreme Court seat vacated by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: Amy Coney Barrett.
Barrett, who had been considered a front-runner in the days following Ginsburg’s death, is a federal appellate judge and someone who has established herself as a reliable conservative on legal issues ranging from abortion to gun control.
Trump hailed Barrett as “a woman of remarkable intellect and character,” saying he had studied her record closely before making the pick.“I looked and I studied, and you are very eminently qualified,” he said as Barrett stood next to him in the White House Rose Garden.
"Over the past week, our nation has mourned the loss of a true American legend," Trump said. "Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a legal giant and a pioneer for women. Her extraordinary life and legacy will inspire Americans for generations to come. Now we gather in the Rose Garden to continue our never-ending task of ensuring equal justice and preserving the impartial rule of law. Today it is my honor to nominate one of our nation's most brilliant and gifted legal minds to the Supreme Court. She is a woman of unparalleled achievement, towering intellect, sterling credentials and unyielding loyalty to the constitution: Judge Amy Coney Barrett."
Former Vice President Joe Biden responded to the nomination in a tweet.
“Today, President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court — a jurist with a written track record of disagreeing with the Court’s decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act. Vote like your health care is on the ballot — because it is,” the tweet read.
GOP-led Senate panel advances Barrett despite Dems' boycott
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate Judiciary Committee voted Thursday to advance Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination to the full Senate as Republicans powered past Democrats' boycott of the session.
Democratic senators refused to show up in protest of the GOP's rush to install President Donald Trump's nominee to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Never has the Senate confirmed a Supreme Court nominee so close to a presidential election.
The Republicans, who hold the majority, voted in favor of Barrett, a conservative judge. Senators plan to convene a rare weekend session for procedural actions ahead of a final confirmation vote expected Monday.
“Barrett deserves to be on the Supreme Court and she will be confirmed,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the committee chairman. Democrats, he said, “made a choice not to participate.”
Instead, Democrats arranged for posters to be placed at their spots of constituents they said had been helped by the Affordable Care Act.
The 48-year-old federal judge’s ascent to the high court would lock a 6-3 conservative majority on the court for the foreseeable future.
Trump's Republican allies in the Senate are counting on Barrett's ascent to improve their standing with voters. The court could open a new era of rulings on the Affordable Care Act, abortion access and even the results of the presidential election.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer announced the planned boycott in a speech late Wednesday on the Senate floor.
“We should not be moving forward on this nomination,” Schumer said, calling Barrett’s views “so far out of the mainstream.”
Unable stop the confirmation, Democrats have been trying unsuccessfully to stall the process until after the Nov. 3 election, so the winner of the presidency could name the new nominee. “These are all such violations of American norms, values, decency and honor,” Schumer said.
I fully expect ACB will be confirmed. The Dems have all but given up on fighting that battle. Instead, they are going to focus on packing the court if Biden wins.