4 ms·
One can't claim this without addressing Obama's (correct) decision to follow the spirit of the law and not push through[1] Merrick Garland when Republicans refu
by nl 1y ago
One can't claim this without addressing Obama's (correct) decision to follow the spirit of the law and not push through[1] Merrick Garland when Republicans refused to conduct committee hearings[2].
[1] https://newrepublic.com/article/138787/obama-can-put-merrick-garland-supreme-court https://newrepublic.com/article/138787/obama-can-put-merrick...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...
- mikem170 1y agoThat's half the story... As you said, McConnell and the Republican Senate refused to hold hearings on Obama's Supreme Court nominee, in March more than seven months before the election 2016 election - "Give the people a voice in the filling of this vacancy" said McConnell. [1] The other half: Four years later, they had no problem confirming Trump's nominee in late October, not two weeks before Trump's 2020 election - and McConnell said "The precedent only applies when different parties control the Senate and the White House." [2] To me the inconsistency seems contrary to the spirit of democracy. [1] https://www.republicanleader.senate.gov/newsroom/remarks/mcconnell-on-supreme-court-nomination https://www.republicanleader.senate.gov/newsroom/remarks/mcc... [2] the precedent only applies when different parties control the Senate and the White House