Thursday, March 17, 2016


So it is then that Barry has now made it official and nominated the individual who he would like to see as the replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia.  And it was Judge Merrick Garland, who Barry has now nominated to the Supreme Court, that said during when first introduced by Barry “Almighty”, that if the Senate confirms him, he promises to serve with fidelity to the Constitution and the law.  He said, “Fidelity to the Constitution and the law has been the cornerstone of my professional life and is the hallmark of the kind of judge I have tried to be for the past 18 years.”  But then, what else would you have expected him to say?

Garland, who currently serves as the chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, made his remarks during a Rose Garden ceremony at the White House to announce his nomination to the Supreme Court to replace the late Antonin Scalia.  He said, “Trust that justice will be done in our courts, without prejudice or partisanship is what in a large part distinguishes this country from others. People must be confident that a judge’s decisions are determined by the law and only the law.”  Well then, that’s the real question isn’t it?  Can we be confident that he will base his decisions not on politics but on the Constitution?  Doubtful.

And he went on to say, “For a judge to be worthy of such trust, he or she must be faithful to the Constitution and to the statutes passed by the Congress. He or she must put aside their personal views or preferences and follow the law, not make it.”  And added, “Fidelity to the Constitution and the law has been the cornerstone of my professional life and is the hallmark of the kind of judge I have tried to be for the past 18 years.”  He said, “If the Senate sees fit to confirm me to the position for which I have been nominated today, I promise to continue on that course.”  Yet I can’t help but wonder if he might have had his fingers crossed the entire time.

And while the last thing I would ever want to do is rain on anyone’s parade, I feel that I would be remiss if I failed to point out five quick facts that everyone should know when it comes to Barry’s recent nominee, Judge Garland.  And we need to be aware of the potential disaster that he represents, because once he’s placed on the court, it’ll be too late to do anything about it.

1. Garland is considered anti-Second Amendment. As the National Review noted last week: “Back in 2007, Judge Garland voted to undo a D.C. Circuit court decision striking down one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation” and voted “to uphold an illegal Clinton-era regulation that created an improvised gun registration requirement.”  Barry will use his pick to pursue a gun control agenda.

2. Garland has favored environmental regulations. As SCOTUSblog noted in 2010: “On environmental law, Judge Garland has in a number of cases favored contested EPA regulations and actions when challenged by industry, and in other cases he has accepted challenges brought by environmental groups.” That could be very important, with Barry’s Clean Power Plan in the balance.

3. Garland’s positions on abortion and social issues are murky. Some liberals are worried that Garland may not be unambiguously pro-choice. Richard Wolf of USA Today writes: “During 19 years at the D.C. Circuit, Garland has managed to keep a low profile. The court’s largely administrative docket has left him without known positions on issues such as abortion or the death penalty.”

4. Garland would maintain the Court’s demographic profile. He is the second Chicagoan Barry has nominated. He is no “wise Latina,” and is the first man Barry has chosen. But Garland, like Scalia, is a graduate of Harvard Law, keeping the number of Crimson justices at five. If confirmed, he would also be the fourth Jew on the Court, preserving the odd exclusion of evangelical Protestants.

5. Republicans have supported Garland in the past. As to be expected numerous RINOs are already crawling out of the woodwork and making noise about supporting Garland, Senators Jeff Flake and Orrin Hatch to name just a couple.  Hatch in particular has been outspoken in his support for Garland as the best Republicans could expect from the Clinton administration. More recently, he suggested he would welcome Garland.  But let’s keep things in perspective here, shall we?  Supporting Garland for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia should be considered a far cry from supporting him for the Supreme Court!

With me, it’s simply a matter of trust.  I do not trust our president, therefore I do not trust anyone he nominates.  While that may not be fair to Judge Garland, it’s where I find myself today regarding our president.  And even though Judge Garland may be considered a ‘centrist’ by some, the truth is that his appointment to the seat left by Justice Antonin Scalia would result in what has been referred to by some as a historic change in the court.  And not a positive one, at least for those of us who actually do respect our Constitution.  And let’s be honest, if that were not the case why then would Barry even seek to place him on the high court in the first place.

When you get right down to it I think that there are two ways to think about the change. One is to compare Judge Garland with Justice Scalia. The second is to think about how Judge Garland might shift the court’s balance of power.  His addition to the court would result in the court becoming more liberal than at any point in nearly 50 years, and that we simply cannot afford.  While we don’t yet know exactly how Judge Garland would vote if he joined the court, scholars believe that he will be substantially more liberal than was Justice Scalia.  Judge Garland is expected to be ideologically similar to Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, Barry’s previous picks for the court.  Which is wholly unacceptable!

No comments:

Post a Comment