Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution

[David Lockmiller]

(05-27-2023 12:30 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 08:00 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  As the final point of my argument, I ask the following question: Would anyone care to explain briefly why Merrick B. Garland, the current Attorney General of the United States, is not the current Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court?

https://www.npr.org/2018/06/29/624467256...atters-now

Roger, thank you for posting this. I quote therefrom briefly:

In a speech that August in Kentucky, McConnell would say: "One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and I said, 'Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy.' "

McConnell was not alone. The 11 Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee signed a letter saying they had no intention of consenting to any nominee from Obama. No proceedings of any kind were held on Garland's appointment.

Scores of scholars — law professors, historians and political scientists — urged the Senate to at least have a process for Garland as a duly appointed nominee with impeccable qualifications. But some lawyers and academics pointed out that the Constitution empowered the Senate to "advise and consent" but did not require it do so. (Some adding that they thought the Senate still ought to do so.)