WATCH BOTH VP Biden and SC Justice Ginsburg Argued Supreme Court Vacancy SHOULD be FILLED in an Election Year

Share some truth!

President Trump and the Republican Senate to Follow the Advice of BOTH Former VP Biden and the Late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Both former VP Joe Biden and the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that the Senate SHOULD confirm a Supreme Court nominee, even in an election year and even if the opposing party controls the Senate. With that being their position when Obama was President and the opposing party controlled the Senate, what would they expect when Trump is President and his own party controls the Senate? Of course the Republican controlled Senate would confirm President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee and that’s exactly what the Republican Senate intends to do! #FillThatSeat!

Listen to what former VP Joe Biden had to say back in 2016 (above video) about filling a Supreme Court Vacancy in an election year (back when he could still form complete sentences most of the time).

I said and I quote: “If the President consults and cooperates with the Senate, or moderates his selections then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justice Kennedy and Justice Souter.” End of quote. I made it ABSOLUTELY CLEAR. That I WOULD go forward with the confirmation progress, process as chairman, EVEN a few months before a presidential election, if the nominee were chosen with the advice and not merely the consent of the Senate. JUST as the constitution requires. My CONSISTENT advice to presidents of both parties including this President, has been that we should engage FULLY in the constitutional proc, process of advice and consent. And my CONSISTENT understanding of the Constitution has been the SENATE MUST DO SO AS WELL. PERIOD! THEY HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO DO SO.

Because there was no vacancy after the Thomas confirmation we can’t know what the President and the Senate might have done. But here is what we do know. Every time as the ranking member or chairman of the Judiciary Committee I was responsible for eight justices and nine total nominees of the Supreme Court. More than – I hate to say this – anyone alive. I can’t be that old. Some I supported, many I voted against, but in all that time, EVERY NOMINEE was greeted by committee members. EVERY NOMINEE got a committee hearing. EVERY NOMINEE got out of the committee EVEN if they didn’t have sufficient votes to pass within the committee because I believe the Senate says, THE SENATE, must advise and consent. And EVERY NOMINEE, including Justice Kennedy in an election year, got an up and down vote. Not much of the time, not most of the time, EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY TIME.

So now I hear all this talk about the Biden rule. It’s frankly ridiculous. There is no Biden rule. It doesn’t exist. There’s only one rule I ever followed on the judiciary committee, that was the Constitution’s clear rule, of advice and consent. Article II of the Conste – Clons – the Constitution clearly states whenever there is a vacancy in one of the courts created by the Constitution itself, the Supreme Court of the United States, the President SHALL, NOT MAY, the President SHALL APPOINT SOMEONE TO FILL THE VACANCY, WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT, of the United States Senate. And advice and consent includes consulting AND VOTING.

Nobody is suggesting individual Senators have to vote YES on any particular Presidential nominee. VOTING NO IS ALWAYS AN OPTION AND IT IS THEIR OPTION. BUT SAYING NOTHING, SEEING NOTHING, READING NOTHING, HEARING NOTHING, and deciding in advance simply to turn your back before the President EVEN NAMES A NOMINEE, IS NOT AN OPTION THE CONSTITUTION LEAVES OPEN.

VP Joe Biden, March, 2016

President Trump and the Nation Mourn Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

As President Trump said, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was an amazing woman. She had an amazing life. The entire nation mourns her loss.

Rest in peace Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg!

Listen to What Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Herself Had to Say About Filling a Vacancy in an Election Year

When it comes to filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court we should follow what she herself had said the last time there was a vacancy in an election year.

Just because the previous vacancy was while Obama was President and this time Trump is President doesn’t mean the vacancy is any less important. The reason Obama’s vacancy was not filled was because the opposing party controlled the Senate and the Senate chose not to fill the vacancy. Now the Senate is controlled by the same party of the President and it is their constitutional prerogative to fill the vacancy if they so choose.

In July of 2016, when asked by the NY Times if the Senate had an obligation to take up the President’s Supreme Court nomination to fill a vacancy in the election year, her answer was immediate.

“That’s their job. There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year.”

— Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 2016 NY Times Interview

Apparently they said her last wish was to have her seat on the Supreme Court filled by the next President.

If a Supreme Court Justice wishes to be replaced by their own party, then they may retire while their own party is in power. If they choose not to do that, due to hubris that their own party will remain in power, that’s their prerogative, their choice… and their problem.

This vacancy occurred during the Presidency of Donald Trump, so he will be the one to nominate her successor and the Republican Senate will confirm that successor. Does anyone seriously think the Democrat party would do anything else if the roles were reversed? Of course not!

If You Enjoyed this Post PLEASE SHARE IT!

Let us know with a comment below, subscribe to our blog, visit our sponsors and bookmark and use our link the next time you buy anything on Amazon!
We may earn a small fee from the links on this site, at NO additional cost to you.


Leave a Reply