Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) met with President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, Tuesday on Capitol Hill, where he told reporters that he would consider voting for Garland’s confirmation.
“We need open-minded, rational, responsible people to keep an open mind to make sure the (confirmation) process works,” he told reporters, according to Reuters.
“I think when you just say, ‘I’m not going to meet with him at all’ – that’s too closed-minded,” Kirk added when asked whether Republican senators were irrational or close-minded not to meet with Garland, according to Reuters.
Kirk, the first Republican senator to meet with Garland, said it was “leading by example” by sitting down with Garland himself, according to the Washington Post. Other Republican senators also have said they are willing to sit down with Obama’s nominee.
“I’m showing what a rational, responsible guy would do who really wants the constitutional process to go forward,” Kirk said, according to the Post.
Kirk also told reporters that he would consider voting for Garland. He previously told colleagues to “man up and cast a vote” on the Supreme Court nominee, the only Republican senator so far to do so.
Asked he’d vote for Garland’s confirmation, Kirk responded: “Obviously I’d consider voting for him.”
— Jared Halpern (@JaredHalpern) March 29, 2016
I asked Kirk if he’d consider voting for Garland, he said he may. That’s further than any R. “Obviously I would consider voting for him.”
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) March 29, 2016
The Illinois senator said that Garland’s nomination “shouldn’t be just for nothing.”
“We should have a long discussion about key issues before the court with one of the most eminent jurists in the country,” he said before praising Garland’s “very precise and brilliant” mind.
Following the meeting, Kirk indicated that sitting down with the nominee is part of the Senate doing its job.
“I think we should be doing out job… part of my job in providing advice & consent is getting to know my own constituent.” Sen Kirk #scotus
— Lisa Mascaro (@LisaMascaro) March 29, 2016
McConnell will cave. Garland is the most moderate he will get. Hillary will nominate someone more liberal. Hearings will be held as soon as the GOP accepts that they will lose in November. So most likely in June.
I don’t know about that. I think they’ve already resigned themselves to losing the WH in Nov. As for the Senate, it seems like Yertle has painted himself in a corner and even if he’s contemplating easing his way out, the paint will be wet for a while. If they hold hearings in June, that’d be a month and a half away from The Reckoning (Also known as the convention). Who knows…
Funny how one behaves like an adult when they discover that acting like a petulant child might get them fired by the voters in November.
I expect McConnell is simply letting Senators say what they need to say relative to the realities of their situation in their particular state.
It’s obvious why Kirk is saying what he’s saying, but Collins just won re-election in 2014. Her position is more interesting. There must be an agenda I’m missing because she ultimately almost always sticks with the party leadership.
Wonder if there is a way to determine by his face if Mitch is depressed… He may suck his lips so far in that esophageal peristalsis will make him disappear on himself.