Hatch says GOP would hold hearings on Garland during lame duck session if Hillary wins the election.
That would deprive Hillary of the chance to name a black, otherwise nonwhite, or Hispanic woman given to liberal judicial activism, as it is widely thought she would do.
If Hillary wins and the Republicans start to move toward confirming Garland, can the president stop the process by withdrawing his nomination?
Nothing in the constitution says he can.
And for that matter there seems to be some notion he would not want to, that having appointed two relatively activist women he now wants to appoint a white man whose approach to the law is more satisfactory to him.
And his expectation and intention all along was that the GOP-controlled senate would confirm his choice during the lame duck session in order to deny Hillary her chance, but not otherwise.
It is said that Garland, unlike the activists who have give us the sexual and civil rights revolutions and numerous other liberal innovations since the Warren Court, prioritizes in his decisions deference to elective officials and their will, and that this is why Obama wants him on the court.
(Such deference and his reputation as a moderate liberal seem to indicate the constructions of American social democracy such as the regulatory state, Obamacare, CHIPS, and entitlement programs will be safe in his hands.)
Can senate Democrats prevent his confirmation by voting against him?
Are they sufficiently numerous?
Would enough of them want to do that?
No comments:
Post a Comment