A key part of the conservative argument will be that it's unprecedented for the president to nominate a candidate during an election year. "It’s been standard practice over the last 80 years to not confirm Supreme Court nominees during a presidential election year," said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) on Saturday.
Igor Volsky, a staffer at the liberal Center for American Progress, responded with a tweet listing justices who have been confirmed in election years:
1. Oliver Ellsworth, 1796VOX
2. Samuel Chase, 1796
3. William Johnson, 1804
4. Philip Barbour, 1836
5. Roger Taney, 1836
6. Melville Fuller, 1888
7. Lucius Lamar, 1888
8. George Shiras, 1892
9. Mahlon Pitney, 1912
10. John Clarke, 1916
11. Louis Brandeis, 1916
12. Benjamin Cardozo, 1932
13. Frank Murphy, 1940
14. Anthony Kennedy, 1988
At least 14 Supreme Court justices have been confirmed during election years
Updated by Timothy B. Lee
"I plan to fulfill my constitutional responsibilities to nominate a successor in due time."
5 comments:
Meaningless comparison, Tom. No one is going to be confirmed until a new President takes office. It's going to be a referendum election. Of course Obama could give a nuclear option and do a recess appointment. If he does that as a lame duck you'll see fireworks unlike any in our nation's history.
The pundits are already saying that the GOP has apparently decided to turn this into an election about Roe v. Wade.
The comparison is about the GOP rushing out to claim that their case is SOP. The facts show that it is not. The debate moderator was astute and brave enough to point that out to Ted Cruz.
The rush even when Scalia was barely dead is about framing the debate.
I haven't heard Roe v Wade uttered once. I have heard immigration and 2nd and 1st Amendment erosion as arguments against potential activist nominee. My guess is that the safe bet from the GOP side is to make this a referendum election on Scalia replacement. If Obama chooses to circumvent then there will be political hell to pay. Can't see him doing it.
Obama has already said that he will nominate a replacement. It will energize the Democratic base. Not doing so would be to cave the GOP and either demoralize the base or (inclusive) energize it against the Democratic Establishment. Politically, Obama has no choice other than making a fight over it.
Of course, the GOP will demand a replacement who is a clone of Scalia or to the right of him.
The election was going to be in part about SCOTUS, but now it will be explicit rather than implicit and there will be a lot of discussion of conservative versus liberal approach to the US Constitution and US law.
Pro-Life News (http://www.lifenews.com) has, of course, been all over the passing of Scalia wrt to Roe v. Wade
While Roe is central for the right, the Left is more broadly concerned with Scalia's philosophy of jurisprudence.
Rolling Stone
What Antonin Scalia's Death Means for the Supreme Court and the Country
Among the significant implications of Scalia's death: For this term, 'Roe v. Wade' is safe
By David S. Cohen
Think Progress
The Simply Breathtaking Consequences Of Justice Scalia’s Death
By Ian Millhiser
LA Times
Scalia's death puts Supreme Court at the center of the presidential campaign
Cathleen Decker
Post a Comment