Former Army Under Secretary Norman Augustine cynically captured the essence of the need for clarity in speaking. He noted, “Simply stated, it is sagacious to eschew obfuscation.” One unable to grasp the meaning of Augustine’s words understands the message. As we find our political leadership divided on the critical issue of filling a vacant seat on the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) – an issue demanding clarity – Democrats engage in the obfuscation game, aimed at currying public support to question the president’s right to do so.
The fight over replacing liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg with President Donald Trump’s nominee, constitutionalist Judge Amy Coney Barrett (ACB), on the SCOTUS has involved obfuscation accompanied with issue avoidance. The former mirrors Democrats successful efforts to malign Trump with the false narrative of Russian collusion by ignoring truth; the latter is their fallback position.
It took most of Trump’s presidency to prove there was no collusion. It was simply the work of anti-Trumpers seeking to derail his candidacy and, after he won the election, to remove him from office. Now, unable to formulate an illegitimacy argument against moving forward with the SCOTUS process, Democrats resort to making voters believe, despite the law, it somehow is. Accordingly, they taint the process with a similar false narrative.
Because the law supporting the Republican position is readily available, with no investigative committee needed to do exhaustive research to explore it, and because Democrats have yet to formulate an illegitimacy or illegality explanation, they seek to muddy the waters surrounding their claim. As far as having any viable argument, Democratic senators are left unarmed. Promoting party talking points but lacking defensive ammo, they take to the anti-ACB front lines, firing blanks.
For example, minutes after Trump made his nomination, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., was first to launch an attack. He set the tone declaring the process an “illegitimate sham” before blasting ACB’s credentials. How one who lied about having a Vietnam war record becomes first to blast ACB’s credentials is somewhat telling of his character. But so eager was Blumenthal to lead the pack and so eager were Democrats to make the attack, their talking points still lacked an answer as to why the process was illegitimate. Pressed for one, Blumenthal was unable to provide it. Interestingly too, almost four years earlier to the day, Blumenthal sang quite a different tune as President Barack Obama sought to seat his SCOTUS nominee. Then, Blumenthal accurately claimed the Senate had a “constitutional obligation” to fill such a vacancy.
Meanwhile, failed presidential nominee contender Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., blasted the confirmation process as well. Armed with as little knowledge about the U.S. Constitution as she had about her Native American ancestry, she beat her war drum claiming the fight to seat a high-court nominee “has just begun.” She demands Republicans respect the integrity of our legal institutions but offers nothing of substance explaining why it disrespects them.
Other Democratic Party leaders have also been left struggling to provide an answer. The party’s vice presidential candidate (or presidential candidate as she has alluded to suggesting a Harris administration), Kamala Harris, delivered a speech criticizing Trump and Republican lawmakers for triggering the SCOTUS process but refused to take questions afterward.
The “Appointment Clause” of the Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) leaves no doubt when it comes to a Supreme Court vacancy; it is a president’s responsibility to nominate and the Senate’s responsibility to provide its “advice and consent” on the nomination. A president’s remaining time in office has no bearing on the matter.
Obviously, when one party controls both the Oval Office and the Senate, such a nomination and confirmation process goes quickly. This was the case when Democrats controlled both, leading to the confirmations of liberal jurists Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. The 1993 confirmation process for Ginsburg took only 42 days, and, because Republicans accepted her as a qualified jurist despite her leftist ideology, she was confirmed by a vote of 96-3.
The courtesy extended Ginsburg by Republican senators was not returned by Democratic senators in 2018 as Trump nominee Brett Kavanaugh was subjected to a contentious confirmation process that denied him due process. However, he did win confirmation by a 50-48 vote.
When Ginsburg was confirmed, Democrats were well within their rights to initiate the SCOTUS process, performing their responsibility to those they represented. They would have been foolish not to take advantage of their control of both the presidency and Senate to do so.
Democrats have criticized Republicans for the failed 2016 effort by Obama to put Judge Merrick Garland on the SCOTUS. But bearing on that outcome was the fact, while Democrats controlled the Oval Office, they did not control the Senate. For Republicans, just like Democrats had used their control of the White House and Senate to confirm Ginsburg earlier, turn around was fair play. Because a Republican majority was seated in the Senate after a dismal 2014 election showing for Democrats, it was able to keep Garland off the court by refusing to call for confirmation hearings. This failure haunted Obama who had taunted Republican leaders soon after his 2009 inauguration by proclaiming, “Elections have consequences.”
As an additional element of the obfuscation effort, liberals have lowered themselves to conduct personal attacks against a legal scholar having a most distinguished record. The attacks have been pathetic, calling Barrett’s adoption of two children from Haiti an act of white colonialism only done to shield herself from criticism of racism, questioning whether the adoptions were legal, condemning her Catholic faith, accusing her of not being a good mother to her seven children due to the demands of her professional career, etc.
With the insights Democrats brazenly reveal as to where their leftist ideology will take us in the years ahead should Joe Biden win November’s election, Republicans would be committing political malpractice by failing to do everything in their power to seat ACB on the Supreme Court.
