Today at 11AM President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. If you've been living under a rock the past few weeks, then here is a refresher: Justice Antonin Scalia passed away several weeks ago, and as the current President, Barack Obama is doing his constitutional duty to appoint another Supreme Court justice. Republicans are claiming that President Obama should wait for a new president to nominate the justice as it is an election year. President Obama nominated a justice anyway.
Why is this important?
If you don't follow politics or do but aren't up on the makeup of our current court, the appointment of a new justice could have a HUGE impact on the court. Currently, the court has a conservative swing, but the replacement of Justice Scalia, one of the most conservative justices, with a liberal-leaning justice would change the racial makeup of the court. Not to mention, the next president may have the opportunity to nominate one or two more justices. This makes the appointment of a new justice before the end of Obama's term consequential and controversial.
Who is Merrick Garland?
Merrick Garland is the Chief Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He is a graduate of Harvard undergrad and Harvard Law, and clerked for Justice William L. Brennan on the Supreme Court. He is widely acclaimed as a brilliant and moderate judge, and has been praised by Republicans and Democrats alike.
Why did President Obama pick Garland?
The praise Garland has garnered from Republicans and Democrats makes him a hard candidate for Republicans to legitimately reject. At 63, Garland is also old for a SCOTUS nominee, as most are in their earlier 50s. Garland, while left leaning, is also seen as a moderate judge. President Obama is thus offering what appears to be a compromise- a moderate judge who won't serve the court as long as other candidates that President Obama could have nominated.
What do I think?
Well not that you asked but I'll tell you anyway. This pick is the best possible outcome for Republicans assuming that a new justice gets confirmed. There is a long precedent of confirming justices in an election year, and the argument that the American people should have a voice is incredibly weak. The American people did have a voice, when they voted to elect President Obama not once, but twice. As the President of the United States, it is his obligation and privilege to nominate justices to the Supreme Court. If President Obama was a sitting president (meaning that the election had already happened and we had a President Elect), then of course it would be logical for him to wait to nominate a justice, but frankly, there are huge cases on the horizon for SCOTUS, and this isn't a time to have a vacancy on the court for a year. To leave this seat vacant is irresponsible, and there is not way in my mind to spin it such that preventing a nominee isn't a blatant political power grab by the Republican party.
What do you think?
The confirmation process will be starting up soon (theoretically) so stay tuned! For some helpful information, see the New York Times coverage of past and present Supreme Court nominees.
