U. S. Constitution- Article II, Section 2.
He (the president) shall have Power… and by and with Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint…Judges of the supreme Court.
That’s it. No when, where, why or how many.
He appoints, they advise and approve, or not.
So far in the 2016 Court contentions some senators have given Obama Advice: “Forget about it during the remainder of your term.” They do not have to give Consent.
Ironically, with all their bloviating, blaming and shaming, Senate Democrats set precedents for preventing any of Obama’s nominees from receiving Consent. Now they and their lackeys lie about it calling this potential obstruction of nominees unprecedented.
A Wall Street Journal editorial summed up how those devious rascals viciously obstructed court appointments on many occasions in the past, especially against President Bush.
First, it seems strange to me that Democrat-Socialists in the Senate would object to having only eight Black Robes—five of them have during recent years been dependably liberal in major decisions. For example:
Clearly unconstitutional mandates on Americans by government to buy a product: Obamacare, is now authorized by five “justices”; Several Supremes have redefined Marriage as between whomever; leftists on the Court allowed the EPA to declare an inert, beneficial element in the atmosphere an air pollutant allowing Obama bureaucrats to carry out his threats to damage our energy industries and economy with draconian regulations. Obama has already “packed the Court” with socialists.
National socialists want more cultural evils and economic ruin to be declared legal, continuing their perpetual assaults on American heritage and prosperity. With the remaining Court, after Justice Scalia died, why wouldn’t they be able to continue accomplishing their mission? Five to three is as good as five to four.
But, back to the Dems’ devious tactics, and their hypocrisies, the WSJ recalls some of their nasty works:
2001-2003- A Democrat majority in the Senate “denied even a hearing before the Judiciary Committee to 32 of Mr. Bush’s nominees.”
2005- Bush nominated Samuel Alito to the Court and 25 Democrats voted to support a filibuster, including Obama, Biden and Clinton. Senator Harry Reid said, “The duties of the Senate are set forth in the U.S. Constitution. Nowhere in that document does it say the Senate has a duty to give Presidential appointees a vote.”
Right, Harry. So I hope that the Republicans stand on that legal point and ignore Obama’s appointments, who certainly will be activist left-wingers.
2007- New York State Senator uber-leftist Chuck Schumer demanded that “Democrats reject any George W. Bush nominee if a vacancy had emerged in his last 18 months in office.”
Democrats targeted Bush nominees on issues other than merit. Miguel Astrada, an accomplished jurist, was subjected to their political vendetta in a 28-month filibuster.
“After blockading Mr. Bush’s judicial slate,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid “changed the rules” for Obama’s nominees on a partisan vote. His “goal was to pack the D.C. Circuit with left-leaning judges” who would favor Obama’s abuses of power.
The Supreme Court has not been tolerant of the people’s wishes nor our constitutional protections against abusive central government. We’ve had too few justices, appointed by both party presidents, who respected those American principles. The late Justice Antonin Scalia was one who did.
Peggy Noonan, writing in the Wall Street Journal opinion page left us with sad but true words from Justice Scalia’s dissent in the 2015 Court decision on homosexual marriage:
With each decision of ours (the Court) that takes from the people a question properly left to them—with each decision that is unabashedly based not on law, but on “reasoned judgment” of a bare majority of this Court—we (the People) move one step closer to being reminded of our impotence.
And, I would add, one step closer to distrust and disdain for government in general; and specifically the unjust courts whose members rule on their cultural biases and ideology rather than constitutional law. It’s judicial malpractice. They should be impeached for bad behavior.
The judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior.
U. S. Constitution- Article III, Section 1