Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton Strengthens Trump’s Case For Nominating Next Justice

(Liberty Bell) – While those on the left are having an all-out tantrum over President Trump likely moving forward to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat left by Ruth Bader Ginsburg after her passing Friday night, conservatives are building one strong case in favor of such a move.

Precedence just simply does not support the idea that President Trump should not move to nominate the next justice. Democrats erroneously cite the fact that former Justice Antonin Scalia died in an election year while Obama was in office and the Senate refused to hold a vote on his nominee. Their argument ignores that 1.) President Obama was, at the time, a lame duck as he was finishing his second term and not eligible for reelection, and 2.) that the opposing party controlled the Senate. Not confirming Obama’s pick was in line with historic precedence, as would be President Trump now choosing one and the Senate voting on it.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton recently strengthened the GOP’s case for moving forward with a nomination on Friday, taking to Twitter to make two more valid points.

“Ruth Bader Ginsburg was confirmed 42 days after she was nominated by President Bill Clinton. @RealDonaldTrump‘s nominee should get the same speedy consideration by the Senate,” Fitton wrote in one tweet.

“COUP KARMA: If the Left can impeach and try to remove a president during an election year, a Supreme Court justice can certainly be appointed during an election year,” he added in a second post. BizPac Review points out that by “COUP KARMA” Fitton was making “reference to what many conservatives have described as an ongoing “coup attempt” against Trump to drive him from office via the impeachment, “Ukrainegate,” and the Russian collusion hoax before that.”

As you are likely aware by now, Ginsburg, 87, died Friday from complications due to metastatic pancreatic cancer. The liberal associate justice was nominated by President Bill Clinton and appointed in 1993 and had battled cancer on numerous prior occasions.

“Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. said in a Friday evening statement. “We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her — a tireless and resolute champion of justice.”

In doesn’t appear, however, that President Trump is in need of much convincing to move forward with the nomination process.

“@GOP We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of which has long been considered to be the selection of United States Supreme Court Justices. We have this obligation, without delay!” Trump wrote on Twitter Saturday morning.

Just as President Trump has made it clear that he plans to make a nomination, the Democrats have made it clear they plan to not only oppose but actively fight against any such nomination from being confirmed before the November election. What a shocker.

“Mitch McConnell set the precedent. No Supreme Court vacancies filled in an election year. If he violates it, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) threatened like a typical Democrat who isn’t getting his way, in a tweet.

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,” added Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) ignoring the fact that the voice of the American people is President Trump and those currently serving in the Senate.

For his part, Obama pressed the Senate to submit Merrick Garland to the full confirmation process in 2016, citing the Constitution.

“When there is a vacant on the United States Supreme Court, the president is to nominate someone. The Senate is to consider that nomination, and either they disapprove of that nominee or that nominee is elevated to the Supreme Court,” he said in a video clip of him explaining the process at an ASEAN conference.

“Historically, this has not been viewed as a question. There’s no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That’s not in the constitutional text,” Obama added.

Looks like even Barack Obama had made the case for President Trump to move forward with the nomination process.

Hold on to your top-hats, folks, this ride hasn’t even left the station yet.

Featured image credit: shorturl.at/nEKV9

6 COMMENTS

  1. There was a time that threats posed by the Democrats would have landed them top billing on something called the “Attorney General’s List of Subversive Organizations,” with the term “subversive” being defined as “advocating the overthrow of the legally-elected government of the United States by force, violence, and/or other than Constitutional means.” The AG’s List needs to be reinstated, and action against the Democrat Party taken accordingly, both individually and collectively!

  2. Are they not to be dismissed after they so blatantly and publicly break their oath that they swore to uphold the constitution?
    Why is this even debatable?
    As an American citizen I would like to see these radical people making up there own rules using the power the people gave them in the first place to do it, removed for breaking their promise to the American people!!

  3. Trump should be allowed to pick the next 9 with the atrocious treatment of the Democrat Party. They have ATTEMPTED to foil any thing that President Trump does and like ALL great men, he still accomplishes much of what he sets out to do. We, the American people, are lucky to have such a great leader.

  4. It is president’s duty and responsibility to nominate an eminent jurist to fill the vacancy. There are no if’s or buts. Let the Senate consider the nomination.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here