Remember how Obama nominated respected moderate Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court, but the Republicans in the Senate refused to even hold hearings on him, giving the excuse that they should let the next president pick the new member of the Supreme Court. Because, you know, they really wanted to give the people a voice in the matter.
So the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee signed a letter stating that the voters would decide the ideological direction of the court and promising that they would not hold hearings on any Supreme Court nominee until a new president took office. As a result, Garland has gone longer than any Supreme Court nominee in history without a vote (or even any discussion or confirmation hearings).
Well, now that the people’s voice is becoming clearer and it is looking like Trump is going to go down in flames, the GOP is afraid that Clinton might do just what they said should happen, and pick someone more ideologically liberal to be on the court.
So this week, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley did a sudden about face and said that in the lame duck session after the election (just to make sure) but before the new president is sworn in, he might be open to considering changing his mind. His statement is a monument of wishy-washy flip-floppery:
[If] we have the election and the majority of the Senate changed their mind about doing it in the lame duck as opposed to Jan. 20, I don’t feel that I could stand in the way of that. But I don’t think I can promote that idea.
Uh, by saying that, isn’t he actually promoting the idea?
I guess “the people” get a voice only if they happen to vote Republican.