Did The New York Times Criticize 'Epic Fury' Using the Man Investigated for...
Gavin Newsom Is Many Things. 'Pro-Family' Is Not One of Them.
Donald Trump Is a Great Man of History
So, What Is Normal?
JFK's Grandson Proves the Networks Still Bend the Knee to Kennedys
Trump Avoiding Repeating History in Iran
Men Are Back
The Supreme Court Should Protect Children From Predators
America Must Lead the Charge Against the Political Abuse of Religion
The Rules Were Never Meant for Them
The U.S. Needs Japan More Than Ever
For America’s 250th Birthday, Make the Senate Great Again
Tony Gonzales Suspends Campaign After Finally Admitting to the Affair He Denied for...
State Department Says That U.S., Venezuela Have Re-Established Diplomatic Relations
Federal Court Sentences Illegal Alien to Prison for $343K SNAP Benefits Fraud
OPINION

I Say We Are Doing Our Job

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
I Say We Are Doing Our Job

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution is clear. A president may nominate judges to the Supreme Court, but the power to grant or withhold consent rests exclusively with the U.S. Senate.

Advertisement

Nowhere does it say that the Senate must hold hearings or votes on these nominees. Senators of both parties have acknowledged and supported this position for years.

In 2005, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., declared, “Nowhere in that document (the Constitution) does it say the Senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote.”

Vice President Joe Biden, former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made a similar argument in 1992. Biden said that “once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over. That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process.”

Both Reid and Biden were right then. Senate Republicans are right now. Despite Democrats previously making the same argument, they now say Republicans are not doing their job. I say we are doing our job.

What’s at stake here is the integrity of the advice-and-consent process, not a particular nominee. It’s the principle, not the individual.

The Democrats’ hypocrisy and political posturing is a perfect example of why Americans are fed up with Washington politicians and why Supreme Court confirmation hearings should not be held against the backdrop of a presidential election.

Advertisement

That is not a partisan viewpoint. The last time a Supreme Court vacancy arose in a presidential election year, and a nominee was confirmed in that same year, was 1932. Not since 1888 was a Supreme Court justice nominated and confirmed by a divided government in a presidential election year.

The upcoming presidential election will not only determine the direction of our country, but also serve as a referendum on the balance of the Supreme Court for generations.

The American people deserve a voice in this process.

Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., the only Fortune 500 CEO in Congress, serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement