In 1997, Merrick Garland was nominated to the court where he is now chief judge, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the second most important court in the nation. Republican Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch was his usual scoldy, sanctimonious self back then.
"Playing politics with judges is unfair, and I am sick of it," Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah said prior to the vote on March 19, 1997. […]
"I would like to see one person come to this floor and say one reason why Merrick Garland does not deserve this position," Hatch challenged his fellow senators. Of Garland, Hatch said: "I know of his integrity, I know of his legal ability, I know of his honesty, I know of his acumen, and he belongs on the court."
That was then, Hatch says. This is entirely different. "There's a difference between the courts," he explains. "This is the court of final resort and it makes final decisions on what the law is." So Garland was the best person ever for the second most important court in the nation, but shouldn't have a vote for the first most important court. Unless, Hatch incoherently rambles, it's after this "toxic" election, perhaps because Garland will be a different nominee after the election? No, of course not.
This is Hatch trying to explain why he is being such a big fat hypocrite about a nominee who was the greatest thing since sliced bread a decade ago but now doesn't deserve a vote. Or why President Obama trying to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court is playing politics, but the unprecedented refusal of the Republican Senate to consider the nominee isn't.
Please donate $3 today to help turn the Senate blue. The future of the Supreme Court depends on it.