Obama Announces Merrick Garland As #SCOTUSnominee [Video]

Obama Announces Merrick Garland As #SCOTUSnominee [Video]

Obama Announces Merrick Garland As #SCOTUSnominee [Video]

This morning as we are picking ourselves up after another crazy day of primaries around the country; the President forged ahead with his plan for a U.S. Supreme Court nomination. You may recall that Jenny wrote of the potential three nominees here. So it should come as no surprise that her instincts along with many others watching this process were spot on. This email statement from the President to his supporters started the ball rolling.

“As president, it is both my constitutional duty to nominate a justice and one of the most important decisions that I — or any president — will make,” Obama wrote.
“I’m confident you’ll share my conviction that this American is not only eminently qualified to be a Supreme Court justice, but deserves a fair hearing, and an up-or-down vote,” he added, nodding to the fierce fight with senators that lies ahead.

Merrick Garland, currently the chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is the President’s chosen nominee.

Merrick Garland
Merrick Garland

Garland does have quite the interesting background, as Jenny pointed out.

Garland was under consideration in 2010 for Justice’s Steven’s seat which was eventually granted to Elena Kagan. Garland is a Harvard Law graduate and has spent time in both the public and private sector. He clerked for Justice William Brennan. He has been described as being more center than to the left.

In fact, his background is even more interesting when you consider other components of his resume:

Garland, a Chicago native, was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals by Bill Clinton in 1995, but only confirmed in 1997 after Clinton’s re-election. He previously had served in the Justice Department and oversaw the investigation into the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 that killed 168 people.

The President made the announcement formal with this speech lecture in the Rose Garden and urged everyone to be “fair.”

Needless to say the Twitter universe is offering their opinions right and left.

So lesser of two evils I guess?

No pressure there right?

In an already contentious campaign season where the cage fights seem to multiply exponentially after every debate or rally; another battle has been thrown into the mix. This is where we will find out how many in Congress and across this country truly understand the words and intent of our Founding Fathers when they wrote Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of our Constitution:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Advice and Consent. Key words to remember. The President can certainly nominate someone to fill the very BIG shoes left by the late Justice Antonin Scalia. However, that does NOT mean that the Senate is REQUIRED to agree with his choice. Sorry Mr. President, nowhere in this clause does it say that the Senate must BLINDLY consent to a nominee just because you say so.

Judge Garland may indeed be a very qualified person to sit on the United States Supreme Court. I don’t know. What I do know is this, we’d better buckle up ladies and gentlemen. The carnival ride that we call the 2016 Presidential Election just got a lot bumpier.

Written by

  • Jodi says:

    I think they may regret their no-vote stance. Consider this: If Hillary wins, and the Senate reverts to Dem control, both of which are highly likely…guess what.

    Obama is laying bait, and as usual, they’re taking it.

    • Jodi says:

      Just read this guy is a second amendment squish. Deal-breaker right out of the gate.

    • Nina says:

      I know. Its not pretty to contemplate that’s for sure.

      I’ve thought for a while that the Senate actually SHOULD review his credentials and then say NO. There is tons of precedent for that. AND that would give us a stronger likelihood of keeping some key seats in R hands…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner