Indiana’s U.S. Senators offer differing opinions on SCOTUS nominee

WASHINGTON (WOWO): Both of Indiana’s U.S. Senators have weighed in on President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, and as expected, both are on different sides of the issue.

Republican Senator Dan Coats stood by his belief that the next president should fill Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat and actually called upon previous precedents set by Democratic leadership to back his stance.

In 1992, then-Senator Joe Biden, said, “Can our Supreme Court nomination and confirmation processes, so racked by discord and bitterness, be repaired in a Presidential election year? History teaches us that this is extremely unlikely. It is my view that if the President…presses an election-year nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over…President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not–and not–name a nominee until after the November election is completed.”

In 2005, 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.”

In 2007, Senator Chuck Schumer said, “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation [for justices]. The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. …[W]ith respect to the Supreme Court, at least, I will recommend to my colleagues that we should not confirm a Supreme Court nominee except in extraordinary circumstances.”

Democratic Senator Joe Donnelly had less to say about Garland’s nomination. He says it is the Senate’s duty to consider Supreme Court nominees. Donnelly ended his statement by saying U.S Senators “should do the job we were elected to do.”


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here