By Charles C. W. Cooke
Saturday, September 19, 2020
With the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, there is a
vacancy on the Supreme Court. We will now watch a frenetic debate over whether
it is “proper” for the Republican Senate to fill that vacant seat before the
presidential election.
I must confess that, while I accept that the history is
certainly on the side of filling it, I have never found this debate especially
meaningful. As I wrote when Antonin Scalia died, this is an entirely
straightforward question, the details of which are the same at all times within
the cycle. In our system, the president gets to nominate a justice, and the
Senate gets to decide whether to accept that nomination, to reject that
nomination, or, if it likes, to completely ignore that nomination. This was
true in 2016, and it is true now. The game requires both players. If they are
both willing, the vacancy is filled. If one is not willing, the vacancy
remains. And that, ultimately, is all there is to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment