Senate Needs to Consider Garland

Art+by+AJ+Bouland
Back to Article
Back to Article

Senate Needs to Consider Garland

Art by AJ Bouland

Art by AJ Bouland

Art by AJ Bouland

Art by AJ Bouland

Cody Owen, Opinion Editor

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






The fight between Democrats and Republicans on the nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court is a pretty sickening example of how bad party relations have become in recent years. Garland was nominated by President Obama after the recent death of Antonin Scalia left a vacant seat on the Court. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has sated that he will refuse to bring the nomination to a vote until the election of the next president, saying that it is the responsibility of the next president to decide who will fill the seat. However, this sort of behavior hasn’t been precedent since 1852, which was the last time the Senate refused to act on a nomination in the last year of a presidency. Since then, 9 nominees made in the last year of a presidential term have been confirmed by the Senate.

Likewise, Garland is a nominee who’s had support from Republicans in the past. GOP Senators Thad Cochran, Susan Collins, Dan Coats, John McCain and James Inhofe all voted to confirm Garland to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1997. Orrin Hatch is even quoted as saying “playing politics with judges is unfair, and I am sick of it” in 1997.

The refusal to bring the nomination to a vote is a bunch of partisan garbage. It’s one thing if the vote fails, but it shouldn’t be the decision of a select few men to hold up the entire Senate as well as the Supreme Court for the sake of acting childishly stubborn. McConnell refuses to even meet with Garland. This is ridiculous. The principle of a democracy is that majority rules. McConnell should bring the nomination to a vote and see what the majority decides, not force his own views onto the country by acting like a child.