Thursday, May 5, 2016

It’s Official: Senator Toomey Wants to Hand Supreme Court Appointment to...Donald Trump

From American United for Change 

Washington DC -- With Donald Trump becoming the presumptive Republican presidential nominee Tuesday night after Senator Ted Cruz suspended his campaign, Americans United for Change President Brad Woodhouse issued the following statement on the implications for Senator Pat Toomey’s blockade of the President’s Supreme Court nominee Judge Merrick Garland, who brings to the table more federal judicial experience than any other nominee in history:

"It's official. Senator Toomey is refusing to do his job because he wants Donald Trump -- a racist, sexist, misogynistic, nativist, isolationist, pathological liar who said he would date his daughter if they weren't related and won't rule out using nuclear weapons in the Middle East -- to make the next appointment to the Supreme Court. Rooting for a Supreme Court seat to be turned into a reality TV show gameshow prize really reflects poorly on Senator Toomey’s own judgement. The longer Senator Toomey puts politics before the Constitution and keeps the Supreme Court a Justice short, the more dysfunction and uncertainty it invites for businesses and citizens across the country. The polling shows overwhelming public consensus from Independent voters in particular that Judge Garland deserves a hearing and up-or-down vote this year.  By hitching his wagons to the dangerous candidacy of Trump on top of taking this hugely unpopular and unconstitutional ‘no hearings’ stance, Senator Toomey has effectively signed a political suicide pact along with a number of his fellow vulnerable Republican Senate colleagues.”

§  PA Politics.4/28“Toomey said he would support the eventual GOP nominee”

§  Toomey Would Oppose Any Supreme Court Nominee Named By President Obama. According to the Associated Press, “‘I think the question before us now is ... should the outgoing president fundamentally change the balance of the court for the next one or two generations?’ [Pat] Toomey said. ‘I don't think that's reasonable. I think that it's more reasonable for the American people to have a more direct say in that process, which they will do through the election of the president knowing now with certainty that the next president is going to make this really important pick.’ If an Obama nominee comes to a vote, Toomey would oppose the nominee, he said, barring an unlikely Obama decision to nominate someone in Scalia's philosophical mold who would not change the court's balance. One fear, Toomey said, is that the court with a new Obama nominee might become less willing to block Obama from exceeding his legal or constitutional authority. ‘The president intends to change the balance of the court and I am not going to support him changing the balance of the court with nine months before an election, I'm not going to do that,’ Toomey said.” [Associated Press, 2/18/16]

§  A Long-Term Supreme Court Vacancy Leads to Federal Judicial Dysfunction, Uncertainty for MillionsOver 350 law professors warned in a letter to Congressional leaders: ‘A long-term vacancy jeopardizes the Supreme Court’s ability to resolve disputed questions of federal law, causing uncertainty and hampering the administration of justice across the country.’  Put another way: “Any 4-4 tied votes from the Court would result in a default upholding of decisions by regional circuit courts or state supreme courts. Some circuit courts could make federal law for the entire nation. In other areas of the law, Americans could have different constitutional rights in different parts of the country. The U.S. Supreme Court could hold some of these cases over until its next term—which starts in October—leaving millions of Americans waiting for justice.”  USA Today recognized signs of dysfunction are already apparent: “Cases large and small are ending in tie votes. The pace of decisions has slowed slightly, and fewer new cases are being granted.” 

No comments:

Post a Comment