Iranian Official Makes Death Threat Against Donald Trump
Planned Parenthood Sues Over Defunding – Brace for Their Legal Gymnastics
Another Federal Judge Blocks Trump's Efforts to Eliminate Birthright Citizenship
Progressives Desperately Trying to Get Democrats to Back Socialist NYC Mayoral Candidate
Miami’s Future Shouldn’t Belong to the Past
Trump Unfit to Be Called a Clown, Says Actual Clown
U.S. Hits U.N. Hamas Apologist With Sanctions
As AOC Chases the Spotlight, Violent Gangs Terrorize Her District
I Helped Keep FBI Headquarters Secure — It’s Time to Leave It Behind
Securing Our Future: How Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill Puts America First Again
Of Course There's More to the Story About That Detained 'Former Cincinnati Children's...
Military Veteran Wanted for Alleged Role in ICE Ambush at Texas Detention Facility
Musk Had a Five-Word Response to Yaccarino's Resignation
These Are the 'Sickos' Tim Walz Is Fighting to Keep in the US
Facing the Public: Proposed Bill Would Ban Law Enforcement From Wearing Masks
Tipsheet

Republican Senator Wants to Get on With SCOTUS Nomination Before It's Too Late

Sensing a Hillary Clinton presidency is inevitable at this point, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) is urging his colleagues to forward the Supreme Court nomination process before she enters the White House. President Obama's choice in Merrick Garland would be far better than any liberal justice Clinton requests, he argues.

Advertisement

"I said if we were in a position like we were in in '96 and we pretty much knew the outcome that we ought to move forward. But I think we passed that awhile ago," Flake said. "If Hillary Clinton is president-elect then we should move forward with hearings in the lame duck. That's what I'm encouraging my colleagues to do."

Yet, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is refusing to hold a vote. 

The Supreme Court is a significant factor in this year’s election. It was the very first thing the presidential nominees discussed at the debate in Las Vegas this week. Their visions for the court could not be more opposite. Donald Trump talked about appointing pro-life justices who will rule through a conservative bent, while Hillary Clinton spoke of the need to defend Roe v. Wade.

While Garland is not exactly a conservative hero (gun rights activists has some serious concerns) he is more middle-of-the-road than other potential candidates expected to be appointed by a Democrat. Should the GOP just take their chances with him?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement