Graham Says Senate Blockade Of SCOTUS Nom Is ‘Setting A Precedent’

Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) — a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which typically hosts hearings on Supreme Court nominees — said Thursday that it’s “going to be the new rule” that the Senate blocks any nominee that would fill a Supreme Court vacancy that opened within a year before a presidential election.

“We are setting a precedent today. That in the last year of a lame-duck eight-year term that you cannot fill a vacancy in the Supreme Court,” Graham said at a Judiciary Committee meeting Thursday. “Based on what we’re doing here today. That’s going to be the new rule.”

His characterization of the tactic Senate Republicans were taking in vowing to not even to meet with a Supreme Court nominee this year was a shift from how some Republicans initially described it — that it was a “tradition.”

Since the Judiciary Committee began holding hearings for Supreme Court nominations, it has never refused to hold a hearing for a nominee.

Thursday’s Judiciary Committee meeting marked the first major opportunity for a public confrontation of Republicans’ vow not to even consider President Obama’s yet-to-be-name nominee to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Republicans insist that they will only confirm a nominee who is chosen by the next president.

The White House, meanwhile, is going forward with its end of the process and is expected to name a nominee in the coming days.

In his remarks Thursday, Graham promised that if a vacancy opened up under a Republican president in the last year of his or her term, he would also refuse to consider a nominee. He also said he would vote to confirm the nominee offered by the next president if that president was a Democrat, as long as nominee was qualified — and even if the nominee was a liberal judge.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. It’s setting a very very bad precedent. One that could be repeated ad nauseam in other situations by both parties I think. I think the GOP should vote up or down on the nominee. It’s their goddam job.

  2. Repeat after me: President Obama is not a lame duck president, because no one has won an election to replace him yet.

    Then again, the GOP has done everything in their power to treat him as a lame duck since about a minute after he was first inaugurated.

  3. “If we lose the election, Hillary Clinton’s going to pick somebody who I wouldn’t pick. I’m telling every conservative now: don’t expect to lose the election and still get your way.”

    Lindsey Graham

  4. So good to know that a former JAG dismisses the US Constitution so easily. Party before country!

  5. Sen. Graham: “Blockade Of SCOTUS Nom Is Setting A Precedent.”

    I thought the Constitution’s original Three-Fifths of a Person clause was the precedent.

    Republicans have been using that precedent since January 2009.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

103 more replies

Participants

Avatar for lestatdelc Avatar for paulw Avatar for sponson Avatar for ajaykalra Avatar for 1gg Avatar for navamske Avatar for dweb Avatar for jimtoday Avatar for inversion Avatar for tecmage Avatar for denisj Avatar for magical_panda Avatar for zrx1100 Avatar for markpkessinger Avatar for dnl Avatar for darrtown Avatar for occamsrazor2 Avatar for jinnj Avatar for jonney_5 Avatar for gajake Avatar for briannaamore Avatar for machoneman Avatar for sickofitall Avatar for owlcroft

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: