John Cornyn Will Be a Texas Thom Tillis and That’s Awful
Scott Jennings Shredded This Former Dem Rep's Iran Cheerleading on CNN Last Night
Here Are the Two People DNI Gabbard Issued Criminal Referrals for Concerning...
Idiot Math
AI Nude Deepfakes Becoming a Dire Issue in Schools
Pocahontas Wants to Spend Jeff Bezos’s Money
The Pope, Three Cardinals, and the Iran War
In Israel, Garbage Trucks Bring the Garbage
The Implosion of Eric Swalwell: What Was He Thinking?
Debunking Five Tax Day Myths
My Advice to (Young) Women
Immigration in America: Legal Pathways, Border Reality, and the Fight Over Who Belongs
Trump’s Hormuz Masterstroke: How American Energy Dominance Is Exposing China’s Fatal Weakn...
New York Can’t Claim 'Choice' While Silencing It
U.S. Secret Service Seized 13 Card Skimmers in Dallas, Saving $13.5M in Fraud
Tipsheet

NYT Explains Why Democrats' Judicial Complaints Matter More than Republicans'

NYT Explains Why Democrats' Judicial Complaints Matter More than Republicans'

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, as I wrote Thursday, is considering ending the blue slip process for judicial nominees. The blue slip allows senators to block the president's nominees. Dozens of Democrats have now chosen to withhold their blue slips, most recently Minnesota Sen. Al Franken, and McConnell is ready to make it merely a symbolic gesture.

Advertisement

The New York Times editorial board are now accusing the Senate leader of hypocrisy, reminding readers that back when he was in the minority party, McConnell was happy to employ the use of blue slips.

Republican senators exploited their blue slips with abandon, and with little or no explanation. One senator blocked a nominee because she had once said the Constitution did not protect an individual right to bear arms — an accurate description of the uncertainty about the law at the time. Other senators blocked nominees they had previously approved for other courts, or even recommended to the White House themselves. In all, 18 of Mr. Obama’s judicial nominees were scuttled, including six to the Courts of Appeals. That’s not counting dozens more vacancies that languished for years without a nominee because senators made it clear they would object to anyone.

"It’s particularly rich, if not surprising," for McConnell to now wanting to upend the blue slip system, the editors add.

The NYT goes on to acknowledge that Democrats are now engaging in the same form of obstructionism. However, the difference is that the Democrats supposedly have legitimate complaints with the justices that Trump has nominated, whereas the Republicans were on a fool's errand.

Unlike their Republican counterparts, however, these Democrats provided a clear explanation for their opposition: The White House, they said, made no meaningful effort to consult with them before making nominations. Mr. Wyden and Mr. Merkley said Mr. Trump had completely bypassed Oregon’s well-established bipartisan selection committee.

Advertisement

In this "toxic, hyperpartisan age," Trump has an obligation to seek the advice of the Senate, the editors insist. He received 3 million fewer popular votes than Hillary Clinton, so the least he can do is listen to the opposing party, they add.

I wonder why he wouldn't want to seek the advice of Democrats on his judicial nominations after dozens refused to even acknowledge his election victory. Some didn't even consider him legitimate.

However, it seems Trump is warming up to Democratic leadership in other areas, namely the debt and illegal immigration. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement