• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Merrick Garland

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Ohiogal

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Whole country

Merrick Garland has been nominated as the new Supreme Court Justice. He has been the chief justice of the District of Columbia circuit court and was approved by a bipartisan majority -- including seven Republican Senators who will (or should) vote this time around. Let's see if congress will actually do their jobs according to the constitution or if they will still stomp their feet and cry.
 


Zigner

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Does the Constitution actually require that a vote be held? My question is not one based on any partisanship, politics, etc.
 
Ohiogal

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
Zigner said:
Does the Constitution actually require that a vote be held? My question is not one based on any partisanship, politics, etc.
Click to expand...
Article II Section 2 (2):
[2] He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.



The advice and consent of the senate requires they vote as that is how they advise and consent (or not consent). To say they will not provide said advice and consent through a vote (be it an up or down vote), is a violation of their role under the Constitution. That is how that provision of the Constitution has ALWAYS been read to require a vote.
 
L

LeeHarveyBlotto

Senior Member
Ohiogal said:
You have seen that the entirety of the Republican party has stated they will not do a vote on this nominee, correct? That is a far cry from one or two senators saying such.
Click to expand...
Just pointing out that the president and vice president seem to have no shame at the massive level of hypocrisy they demonstrate in this subject matter.
 
Ohiogal

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
LeeHarveyBlotto said:
Just pointing out that the president and vice president seem to have no shame at the massive level of hypocrisy they demonstrate in this subject matter.
Click to expand...
Truthfully all branches of government should do their jobs. This Congress has refused to do a lot of things. Which is disgraceful.
 
Zigner

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Ohiogal said:
Article II Section 2 (2):
[2] He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.



The advice and consent of the senate requires they vote as that is how they advise and consent (or not consent). To say they will not provide said advice and consent through a vote (be it an up or down vote), is a violation of their role under the Constitution. That is how that provision of the Constitution has ALWAYS been read to require a vote.
Click to expand...
Your interpretation is not the same as others. Others contend that the Constitution doesn't say HOW such advice and consent will be given, but does give the Senate the power to make their own rules on procedures, etc. As such, refusing to vote, if allowed by the rules of the Senate, is an allowable option under the Constitution.

AGAIN, I'm not stating any position on the above - just pointing out a different viewpoint.
 
L

LeeHarveyBlotto

Senior Member
Ohiogal said:
Truthfully all branches of government should do their jobs. This Congress has refused to do a lot of things. Which is disgraceful.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, and normally don't care to play the "they started it" game, as I tend to dislike both "theys" about equally. However, for this present administration to pretend to be standing on moral or ethical high ground in this situation would be laughable if it weren't despicable.
 
FlyingRon

FlyingRon

Senior Member
Clearly one of the reasons he was selected because he is such a moderate that the senate will look stupid if they don't even consider him. This can be used for some pretty political clout for the dems coming up if it happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top