If you’re like me, you enjoy seeing political “strategy” being played out.
It’s part of the spectacle we all know and love, and it’s certainty better than watching Donald Trump insult more crucial voters.
If you’re like me, you frequently see headlines that read, “New polling shows Supreme Court blockade could expand Senate map,” or “Sen. Coons says Republicans pose ‘Constitutional threat’ by refusing Supreme Court nominee hearing,” or “Cracks in the GOP wall: The Republicans’ hardline Supreme Court obstruction is crumbling.”
And if you’re like me, you think this is absolutely bunk.
No, Senate Republicans’ tactics will not doom the party. No, the GOP’s actions are not unconstitutional or unique. No, the GOP is smart.
Let’s get into why:
For starters, the Senate is not constitutionally mandated to confirm any presidential nominee. Moreover, senators are not constitutionally mandated to visit or call a presidential nominee.
Not meeting Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Garland, is only impolite, not unconstitutional. If you disagree, show me where the Constitution says otherwise.
Additionally, the oft-criticized obstructionist tactics of the Senate GOP have been used and perfected by Senate Democrats way before this confirmation fight.
Take the vice president. In 1992, Joseph Biden said, “It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over. That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process. Otherwise, it seems to me we will be in deep trouble as an institution.”
Take future Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer: “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation. The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito. Given the track record of (President Bush) and the experience of obfuscation at the hearings — with 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.”
Take President Obama. Back in 2006, he filibustered Justice Alito’s confirmation hearing. He now, thankfully and coincidentally, “regrets” it.
So, we all agree the Senate is not constitutionally mandated to confirm Judge Garland, and the tactics of the GOP are not unique.
Let’s get into why the current tactics are smart.
Saying flat out that the Senate will not vote on nor talk with Judge Garland is a clever move. Once again, not polite, but smart. Saying it puts the GOP in a box is incorrect. It puts them in a fantastic situation.
It’s a safe assumption that the future president’s party will carry the Senate.
Let’s pretend that the GOP loses the presidential election with candidate Trump.
Shocker, I know.
With the presidency lost, and assuming the Senate falls with it, you sprint Garland down the confirmation track. He’s better than anyone Clinton or Sanders would put up. He’s moderate. Bad on guns, yes, but consider the alternatives. As of right now, he does not appear to be Ginsburg 2.0.
Now let’s pretend President Trump wins the Oval Office and the Senate stays in the GOP’s hands.
Republicans just have to wait for President Trump to nominate a (hopefully) conservative pick. Garland’s hearing or confirmation proceedings don’t move, and it all works out.
Heads, the GOP wins. Tails, Democrats lose. At worse, a seemingly moderate jurist is on the court. At best, the GOP has a brand new conservative on the bench.
No matter what you say or what you read, the Senate GOP knows what it’s doing. You can thank the Democratic Party for it.
Michael Beato is a UF political science senior. His column appears on Mondays.
