Without Precedent- The GOP Will Make America Suffer to Keep the Court

The United States Supreme Court has a 5-4 conservative majority on most matters it has decided in recent years. That changed yesterday when one of the five judges on that court, Antonin Scalia, died in his sleep. This vacancy makes the court 4-4 on most major matters, and constitutionally means that President Obama should appoint a nominee to the high court, subject to Senate approval. This is the system of government we live under. This is what is supposed to happen.

That is, unless you are a Republican in Congress. It is February of 2016, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says that the next President, who takes office on January 20th of 2017, should appoint the new judge. That means eleven (11) months of time will pass before there would even be a nominee, and probably more in the neighborhood of 13 or 14 months will pass before there would be a judge on the bench. If you have a case that is pending before the court, your case might go down in a 4-4 split in the meantime, but McConnell doesn't care about that. He just wants the next President to appoint a nominee to the bench.

Why does McConnell want to violate our system of government and make the court not work for a year plus? Because President Obama is a Democrat, and McConnell will not like his nominee for the high court. Nothing more and nothing less can be made of it. It is not better for the court itself to have a vacancy for a whole year. It is not better for the country to have a non-functioning court. It's simply better for McConnell and his party.

Obviously, there are repercussions if President Obama gets to appoint a judge, albeit I agree with them all. "Citizens United" allowing money to flow virtually without any regulations on our political process would be reversed 5-4, rather than it's current status. Scalia wrote the "Heller case" opinion that weakened any gun regulations in this country, and an Obama appointee would probably rule to over-rule that 5-4. Scalia was a part of the 5-4 vote to make George W. Bush President, and also a vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. The 5-4 ruling supporting marriage equality would become 6-3, and so on. Yes, an Obama appointee to this seat would have consequence, even if they weren't as liberal as say Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I get that completely, and I understand that this is why McConnell won't allow a vote for an Obama nominee.

This is not how our country is supposed to operate though. Just because you don't like who the President is, doesn't mean you grind everything to a halt. President Obama has nearly a year left in his Presidency, but the Republicans in the Senate want to declare his Presidency over with. They want to deny his ability to appoint someone to a constitutionally necessary seat, a nomination that is his duty under our system of law.

President Obama should nominate someone. He should nominate someone the Senate has confirmed, maybe even unanimously in the past, to fill Scalia's seat. That person should get a hearing at the Senate Judiciary Committee, and then a vote from the full Senate. That is the system of government we have. President Obama is our duly elected President. Any talk of not naming someone until next year is both ridiculous and stupid.