Only once in the past 100 years did a President (LBJ) attempt to nominate a Supreme Court justice this close to a Presidential election, and the Senate quickly shot that pick down.
After the passing of Antonin Scalia, Obama is making an unprecedented move to nominate a new justice, and liberals are attacking Republicans bent on blocking whoever he nominates (even though these same liberals opposed Bush appointing any new Justices in 2007).
The precedent on nominating Justices in election years is clear. Even the New York Times argued as much during the Reagan presidency, and it wasn’t as close to an election now as it was then:
The New York Times editorial board, October 5, 1987, urging the Senate to reject the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork:
The President’s supporters insist vehemently that, having won the 1984 election, he has every right to try to change the Court’s direction. Yes, but the Democrats won the 1986 election, regaining control of the Senate, and they have every right to resist. This is not the same Senate that confirmed William Rehnquist as Chief Justice and Antonin Scalia as an associate justice last year.
Gee, I guess that means that the Republicans who won control of the Senate in 2014 have every right to resist, right? After all, this is not the same Senate that confirmed Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan…
H/T National Review
If liberals didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all! Help get the word out and share this article on Facebook and Twitter.