The reason Democrats can’t pull the ‘too late’ card on the appointment of a Justice for RBG’s seat is they changed the rules. It was Senator Reid who enacted the nuclear option. Democrats were warned. It is the reason Justice Gorsuch is on the Court.
These are some of the things they plan to do regardless of whether Trump appoints a Justice or not: abolish the Electoral College, make PR and DC states, eliminate the filibuster, and stack the Supreme Court. The GOP must do what they can while they can.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) refused to give Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, a shot at filling the seat vacated after Antonin Scalia’s death in February 2016. Garland never got a confirmation hearing or a vote; many GOP senators refused to even meet with him. He did exactly what the GOP voters wanted him to do.
Then-president Barack Obama portrayed Garland as a right of center compromise judge. People like Judge Napolitano and George Will went along with it at the time. What a joke that is.
If Garland was chosen, the conservative seat would have been filled by a far-left loon. He was on the full court that rejected General Flynn’s Mandamus claim and he was obnoxious.
Judge Garland pressed Powell with a hypothetical:
U.S. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland pressed Powell with a hypothetical.
“If all the district court had done was to ask Flynn to brief the arguments on the separation of powers and permitted an amicus filing but did not appoint amicus, would you still argue against it?”
“I think I still would,” Powell noted.
Hypotheticals are absurd in a court of law but he’s no originalist. Garland’s an activist.
ANTI-GUN CLIMATE WARRIOR
When Obama picked him, he was going for the prize. Garland is a very anti-Second Amendment judge.
Judge Garland was appointed to the bench by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1997, winning Senate confirmation by a vote of 76-23. Prior to that, he served in the Justice Department during the Clinton administration.
There is evidence that Garland would work to reverse D.C. vs. Heller, which affirmed that the Second Amendment confers an individual right to keep and bear arms, and which stands as Justice Scalia’s legacy.
Garland’s record regarding gun control points to his voting to pave the way for stricter gun laws in D.C. Garland’s decision marked a major turning point in restrictions that would prevent gun ownership for those seeking handguns as protective tools for self-defense.
JCN chief counsel Carrie Severino said in a National Review Online post that Judge Merrick’s record on the bench since 1997 “leads to the conclusion that he would vote to reverse one of Justice Scalia’s most important opinions, D.C. vs. Heller, which affirmed that the Second Amendment confers an individual right to keep and bear arms.”
There is also Garland’s 2000 decision in NRA v. Reno. In that case, the National Rifle Association fought against retention of background check information that is collected when people legally purchase guns. The NRA argued that the information was required to be immediately destroyed under the Brady Act. Then-Attorney General Janet Reno’s position was that it was necessary and allowed under the act to retain the data for six months in order to audit the background check system. Garland ruled in Reno’s favor, stating that her interpretation of the Brady Act was reasonable.