McCain Promises A United Republican Front To Block Clinton SCOTUS Nominees

Matt Vespa
|
Posted: Oct 18, 2016 1:35 PM
McCain Promises A United Republican Front To Block Clinton SCOTUS Nominees

Well, if there’s one Republican senator who has vowed to block Clinton’s Supreme Court, it’s Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). The maverick senator, who has earned the ire of the conservative wing of the GOP, has stated he will do just that should Hillary win the presidency. Senate Republicans seems to be in something of a bind. They stood firm in not budging on holding a confirmation hearing for Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland. They endured some media criticism, especially from the Obama administration, for blocking the judicial process, which is insane since the Supreme Court has functioned with seven to eight members for an extended period time in the past—and with more strenuous workloads. Even then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) was caught on the Senate floor saying that judicial nominations during an election year were not appropriate. It didn’t help that Democrats, unable to defend their hypocrisy, simply said that this rule didn’t exist. In the end, the GOP stood firm and now we’re heading towards the finish line of the 2016 cycle. It’s possible that Clinton could trounce Trump, win a majority in the Senate, and put forward a rabid anti-gun, progressive jurist to begin what the Left has been lusting to do for decades: shred our Constitution.

So, McCain is the brave soul who is going to hold the line, though it’s dubious whether he would support nominees from a Trump presidency, as he’s withdrawn his support in the wake of the graphic remarks Trump made about women, which were caught on a hot mic recording for Access Hollywood in 2005 (via The Hill)

Sen. John McCain said he will unite with his Republican colleagues to block any potential Supreme Court nominee Hillary Clinton may offer if elected.

"I promise you that we will, we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton — if she were president — would put up," the Arizona Republican told a Philadelphia radio station on Monday. "This is why we need the majority."

To win control of the Senate, Democrats need to pick up four seats on Nov. 8, or five if GOP nominee Donald Trump wins the White House, a goal they expressed confidence in achieving last week.

McCain has long said he opposes voting on President Barack Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland and believes the Senate should wait for a new president to make a Court pick.

He also said he isn't sure that Trump would be better at picking a justice than Clinton, the Democratic nominee.

Asked in the Monday radio interview if the GOP nominee is the "superior guy" when faced with voting for Clinton because of the Supreme Court, the Arizona Republican said, "I don't know because I hear him saying a lot of different things."

Right now, it looks as if control of the Senate will depend on whoever wins the presidential election, with either running mate giving their respective party the one seat edge in the upper chamber. It’s a 50-50 split, according to Real Clear Politics if you calibrate the 2016 Senate races without toss-ups. Still, that’s not really a mandate to do much of anything if you’re Hillary Clinton, or Donald Trump, especially when it comes to judicial nominations. More pressure will be brought down before Republicans, as they promised to give consideration to a nominee after the election no matter who won. If Clinton does pick an insane liberal, that nominee’s record could be used as a buffer for the media scrutiny that’s to follow for staying in the trenches. If Clinton decides to stick with Garland, should she win on November 8, then the GOP could be forced to budge since he’s not all that controversial compared to other folks the progressive Left want on the bench. Like Donald Trump, Garland is a roll of the dice. He’s angered both liberals and conservatives in his career, liberals with his rulings on enemy combatants and conservatives with his checkered stances on the Second Amendment. But one thing is clear: we all know whom Clinton wants on the Supreme Court, especially on gun rights. It’s a compromise with Garland, though he’s certainly better than the bag of horrors that a President Clinton could unleash on the judiciary.

Let’s see what happens.