Following a hasty declaration that any nomination from President Obama to replace Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia would be dead before arrival, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley might just be having some regrets. His initial reaction was to reject the possibility and to lie about Senate procedure by saying that would be "standard practice." Now that the corpse is cold, Grassley seems to be reconsidering that hard-line stance.
Though the longtime Iowa Republican agrees with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell that the next president should select a new appointee to the nation's highest court, he also told Iowa reporters that he has not made a final decision regarding committee consideration of a future justice and would take things a "step at a time."
"I would wait until the nominee is made before I would make any decisions," Grassley said, according to Radio Iowa. "This is a very serious position to fill and it should be filled and debated during the campaign and filled by either Hillary Clinton, Senator Sanders or whoever's nominated by the Republicans."
That's a very convoluted message, but still boils down to no confirmation for President Obama. So why bother with hearings when it's a foregone conclusion that any nominee will be rejected? It might have something to do with just how radical—and unseemly—their initial reaction was. After all, you've got guys like Republican Sen. Pat Toomey who's running for reelection this year in blue Pennsylvania suggesting that, after all, President Obama has the absolute right and obligation to make a nomination, and that it should "pass an additional level of scrutiny." In other words, have those hearings, then reject the nominee.
There might be more to it, though, like a deep and abiding hatred of Ted Cruz, who's focused his campaign on fighting any nomination and has already promised a filibuster.
Fellow conservative and North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis is warning against the kind of knee-jerk opposition that we've seen so far—and happened to be kicked off by Cruz.
"I think we fall into the trap if just simply say sight unseen, we fall into the trap of being obstructionists," Tillis said.
That ship has long since sailed, but a Supreme Court vacancy has the potential to turn that obstruction into a more concrete issue in the election. But it seems like a new rift is appearing in the Republican Senate over whether they should really all become Ted Cruz, or at least pretend like they're doing the job the Constitution says they should.