GOP Senator: 'Nobody Really Believes' That Next Prez Should Get SCOTUS Pick

[DonViejo]

Source: Talking Points Memo

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) made admissions that could be awkward for his Republican Senate colleagues trying to block President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.

In an interview published Monday, Flake conceded that nobody in the Republican Party "really believes" that late Justice Antonin Scalia's Supreme Court seat should be left for the next president to fill. As proof, he flipped the scenario around and envisioned a Republican president currently in the White House and nearing the end of his term.

"Our position shouldn’t be that the next president ought to decide. Nobody really believes that, because if this were the last year of a Republican presidency nobody would say that," Flake told the Daily Beast.

He added that the Senate's position "ought to be to confirm the most conservative justice to replace Scalia," to maintain balance, even if that means confirming President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland.

-snip-

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeff-flake-merrill-garland-supreme-court

[maxsolomon]

1. It's not "The Scalia Seat", asshole - elections have consequences

Obama even nominated a compromise candidate!

I'll stick by my original prediction: Lame Duck confirmation of Garland.

[ToxMarz]

2. If Hillary wins and we get the Senate Obama should withdraw his nomination

The Senate MUST abolish the filibuster (at least for judicial nominations, including Supreme Court) and Hillary should nominate a true progressive. Then on her second pick she should nominate Garland. They need to learn a lesson.

[chuckie29]

6. Why should she nominate Garland at all?

If the Democrats win the Senate, name Michelle Obama and then Elizabeth Warren and then Cornell West and then Noam Chomsky. I hope that Garland's nomination is withdrawn the day before the election. Show the Republicans the price of playing games with the Supreme Court.

[GulfCoast66]

9. Is this sarcasm??

Cause the idea that anyone would be stupid enough to nominate West or Chomsky is just laughable. No senate, Democratic or Republican would approve them.

And Warren is too old. And do not accuse me of ageism. She would be fine but any president is going to think more strategic and nominate some with potentially 30 years of service in them.

[GulfCoast66]

8. Not happening

Our President is a classy guy and would never make such a dickish move to the guy he nominated. That is a Trump tactic where you step on your people for perceived advantage.

Your saying the president should not get to have his nominee voted on because you do not like him. Instead the next president should nominate a justice you support.

That sounds familiar...

[vkkv]

10. I agree, I don't think of Obama as a weak character. He won't pull Garland back off his pick..nt

and then Obama would make a great Justice Of The SCOTUS.

[awoke_in_2003]

30. No, he should not...

he is currently the president, and there is currently an opening. This (Senate inaction) is a very disrespectful.

[TeamPooka]

18. The President should withdraw Garland's name as a nominee tomorrow. GOP had their chance.

fuck them

[Marthe48]

3. I hope President Clinton nominates a super liberal

And the Democrats win control of the Senate.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. OK, but it would work better if

1) Democrats win control of the Senate,

and then

2) President Clinton nominates a super liberal.

Secretary Clinton should not name any possible choices before the election, especially when she is doing as well as she is now. Leave that to tRump.

[Marthe48]

23. Of course

She won't overplay her hand

[TeamPooka]

19. Super liberal woman of color

[Generic Brad]

21. I hope she nominates President Obama

Let the GOP choke on that! A constitutional scholar and a former president. No one can reasonably stop that juggernaut selection.

[Arkana]

35. Michelle would have his head.

She's sick of Washington, and I don't blame her. If Obama were to follow in Taft's footsteps and become the second President to serve on the Supreme Court, she'd probably hate him forever.

[burrowowl]

24. Me too!

[awoke_in_2003]

31. She will have opportunities...

PBO is the president now, and the Senate needs to be shamed into doing their job.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. GOP is changing their argument

Not Obama's pick is now "most conservative justice" pick

This is a trial balloon

When HRC nominates someone they will consistently say "Not conservative enough"
and continue the blockade

This is going to be very tiring

[DefenseLawyer]

7. I think the are going to reverse course and confirm him in the lame duck session

And we will be stuck with another authoritarian on the Supreme Court.

[NBachers]

11. Yeah- They're scared of who the candidate will be in the next administration.

[rdking647]

12. a president cimton should nominate obama

hes a perfect fit for the court

[moonscape]

14. Except that Obama isn't interested ... n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

32. That has been said about a thousand times...

but people don't listen.

[forgotmylogin]

16. Or Bill Clinton :) n/t

[awoke_in_2003]

33. Too old...

we have several more waiting to retire. We don't need 70 year old people- we need to hold the court for more than 3 years.

[forgotmylogin]

38. What about Michelle Obama?

[awoke_in_2003]

39. What about

actual judges? There are enough out there that we don't have to depend on dynasties to fill seats.

[LoverOfLiberty]

13. Garland will not be seated

Harry Reid will not allow a lame duck Senate to name Garland to the Supreme Court.

[Hekate]

36. Where are you getting that? Has Reid made any indication *at all* ....

...that he thinks Garland is unacceptable?

[LoverOfLiberty]

41. Not that I know of

and he fully expects that Hillary would renominate Garland. But if Democrats retake the Senate, there is no reason for him to cooperate with McConnell and his ilk.

Sorry I can't find anything concrete on this right now. I would say it was just my opinion but it was much talked about earlier this summer.

[alcibiades_mystery]

15. This is the first salvo of the lame duck session hearings

In other words, they know Trump is finished and need to lock in Garland.

[TeamPooka]

17. Great, now let's start the treason trial against the GOP leaders for undermining the US Constitution

[bucolic_frolic]

20. You mean those Saintly Self-righteous Christian Senators

the ones who took an oath on the Bible to uphold the Constitution
and faithfully execute their duties?

Lyin' Hypocrites - all of 'em!
Treason is exactly it

[truthisfreedom]

22. This is quite a curious situation. They have no idea what Trump might do if he's elected.

And they know for sure they won't like what Hillary does. They've got a really good choice at the moment. It would be really humorous if Obama withdrew his nomination but that will never happen. Obama does things because he means them. He's definitely not capricious.

[SunSeeker]

26. They know who Trump's SCOTUS nominees will be. He listed them.

They're all right wing nut jobs, right off the Heritage Foundation's wish list.

[Jeb Bartlet]

25. Republicans are scared

that Trump is going to lose. Now they want to vote on Garland. Well bummer for them, Clinton will be in office and she can make her own decisions on Scotus nominee.

[Hekate]

37. Some of them are also scared Tinyhands might actually win.

Sucks to be them.

[Agnosticsherbet]

27. Their fear is that Clinton would nominate someone like Ginsburg.

Garland will move the court to the left, but not as far left as it could go. The only reason Garland has not been confirmed is because we have a black President and every Republican in the Senate would rather perform cunnilingus on a Pit bull that give Obama a win.

[Retired George]

28. Depends on who wins the Senate

If Schumer becomes majority leader, kiss the filibuster goodbye! President Clinton will have more leeway to go left, although some DINOs will still be there.

[dembotoz]

29. and we have a winner

damn right about that

[awoke_in_2003]

34. The filibuster does not need to go...

it needs to be the way it used to be- as long as you can hold the floor, you can keep it going. What now constitutes a filibuster is a joke.

[Ken Burch]

40. For a second there, I thought this meant the GOP wouldn't confirm ANY new justices 'til 2021.