This post has been updated.
Senate Republicans signaled to President Obama that if he nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, they would consider confirming him during the lame duck session if a Democrat is elected to the White House in November, NPR’s Nina Totenberg reported on Wednesday.
.@NinaTotenberg reports that GOP nudged Obama towards #MerrickGarland as #SCOTUSnominee.@NPR @nprpolitics pic.twitter.com/GMa0m4SXIV
— Renee Montagne (@nprmontagne) March 16, 2016
Totenberg told “Morning Edition” on Wednesday that Republicans had indicated they could be open to confirming Garland under this scenario.
“I’m told that the Republicans in the Senate actually sent some sort of a back channel message to the White House, that if it were Garland they would confirm him if the Democrats prevail in the presidential election. That they would confirm him in the lame duck session. And that the whole caucus would be on board, that it wouldn’t be a fight,” Totenberg said. “I have good sources for this, but, you know, from somebody’s lips to God’s ears, so to speak — who knows.”
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) also suggested on Wednesday that he would be open to confirming Garland during Obama’s lame duck session following the 2016 presidential election.
“I’d probably be open to resolving this in the lame duck,” Hatch told reporters.
“He is a good man, but he shouldn’t be brought up tin this toxic environment,” he added. “I am tired of the Supreme Court being used as a battering ball back and forth on both sides. That is why I’d put it off till next year.”
Hatch has been a longtime supporter of Garland, supporting his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 1997 and describing Garland as a “moderate” just last week.
Hahaha.
“We want the next president to nominate someone. Unless the next president is another Democrat. Then we’ll have a redo, because our principled stand is based on the principle that we get to change the rules as it suits us.”
Good luck with that one, ass clowns.
Or, they may lose the Senate, and Schumer could tell them that we are nuking the filibuster and you get Goodwin Liu for the next 40 years… I’m sure they’ll be begging for Garland then…
Well so much for the idea that this is all a matter of Principle!!!
If we lose, we’re ready to scramble and help confirm someone who will fill a seat that at least is not Saul Alinsky.
Well, of course they said that. If Hillary beats Trump, that probably means they’re staring at a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate. A more craven President (Bill Clinton, e.g.), would respond by withdrawing the nomination after the election, but I doubt Obama would do that to Garland.
So they want to have their cake and eat it too?
Fuck off GOP. Guess what, if you obstruct, we’re going to take the WH, the senate AND a bunch of congressional seats.
Then we’ll get Garland, and probably 2 or 3 more liberal justices. Please proceed!