SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Republicans Rebuked for Utter 'Perversion of Constitutional Duties'
Groups say GOP blocking Supreme Court justice nominee 'would cause a constitutional crisis that would shake the very foundation of our democracy'
Feb 25, 2016
Scores of organizations representing a wide range of interests have denounced Republican obstructionism on a Supreme Court nominee, writing to the Senate Judiciary Committee's Republican members on Friday that their "unprecedented and destructive" decision represents "a dereliction of constitutional duty."
The letter (pdf) to committee chair Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and the other GOP members follows the body's letter earlier this week declaring, "This committee will not hold hearings on any Supreme Court nominee until after our next president is sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017," and stating that doing so was executing their "constitutional authority."
But such a claim, the 82 groups, which include Common Cause, Defenders of Wildlife, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the NAACP, write, "is a clear perversion of your constitutional duties as understood by almost every scholarly authority on the topic and by most Americans."
Their letter points to Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, and states, "The Senate's duty is to evaluate a nominee's fitness and qualifications, not to pick the President making the nomination."
"It is a dereliction of your constitutional duty to handcuff the Supreme Court for two terms," the letter continues. "Your proposed course of action would cause a constitutional crisis that would shake the very foundation of our democracy."
"We condemn this unprecedented overreach and call on you to uphold the Constitution by giving fair consideration, including timely hearings and votes, to the next nominee to the Supreme Court."
Expressing a similar reaction is Geoffrey R. Stone, Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago. He writes that the Republican decision not to consider any justice nominee is "unconscionable."
"If they carry through on this threat, it will be directly incompatible with their solemn responsibilities under the United States Constitution. It would be an action morally and legally on a par with the Southern Manifesto," Stone argues.
Common Cause this week also launched a website, senatedoyourjob.org, to let users see where their senators stand on allowing Obama to appoint a nominee since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia left the nation's highest court evenly split.
Presidential hopefuls Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have also expressed outrage over the Republican efforts to block a nominee.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
bernie sanderscommon causeconstitutional crisisdefenders of wildlifeelection 2016republican partysenate judiciary committeeus congressus supreme court
Scores of organizations representing a wide range of interests have denounced Republican obstructionism on a Supreme Court nominee, writing to the Senate Judiciary Committee's Republican members on Friday that their "unprecedented and destructive" decision represents "a dereliction of constitutional duty."
The letter (pdf) to committee chair Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and the other GOP members follows the body's letter earlier this week declaring, "This committee will not hold hearings on any Supreme Court nominee until after our next president is sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017," and stating that doing so was executing their "constitutional authority."
But such a claim, the 82 groups, which include Common Cause, Defenders of Wildlife, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the NAACP, write, "is a clear perversion of your constitutional duties as understood by almost every scholarly authority on the topic and by most Americans."
Their letter points to Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, and states, "The Senate's duty is to evaluate a nominee's fitness and qualifications, not to pick the President making the nomination."
"It is a dereliction of your constitutional duty to handcuff the Supreme Court for two terms," the letter continues. "Your proposed course of action would cause a constitutional crisis that would shake the very foundation of our democracy."
"We condemn this unprecedented overreach and call on you to uphold the Constitution by giving fair consideration, including timely hearings and votes, to the next nominee to the Supreme Court."
Expressing a similar reaction is Geoffrey R. Stone, Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago. He writes that the Republican decision not to consider any justice nominee is "unconscionable."
"If they carry through on this threat, it will be directly incompatible with their solemn responsibilities under the United States Constitution. It would be an action morally and legally on a par with the Southern Manifesto," Stone argues.
Common Cause this week also launched a website, senatedoyourjob.org, to let users see where their senators stand on allowing Obama to appoint a nominee since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia left the nation's highest court evenly split.
Presidential hopefuls Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have also expressed outrage over the Republican efforts to block a nominee.
Scores of organizations representing a wide range of interests have denounced Republican obstructionism on a Supreme Court nominee, writing to the Senate Judiciary Committee's Republican members on Friday that their "unprecedented and destructive" decision represents "a dereliction of constitutional duty."
The letter (pdf) to committee chair Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and the other GOP members follows the body's letter earlier this week declaring, "This committee will not hold hearings on any Supreme Court nominee until after our next president is sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017," and stating that doing so was executing their "constitutional authority."
But such a claim, the 82 groups, which include Common Cause, Defenders of Wildlife, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and the NAACP, write, "is a clear perversion of your constitutional duties as understood by almost every scholarly authority on the topic and by most Americans."
Their letter points to Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, and states, "The Senate's duty is to evaluate a nominee's fitness and qualifications, not to pick the President making the nomination."
"It is a dereliction of your constitutional duty to handcuff the Supreme Court for two terms," the letter continues. "Your proposed course of action would cause a constitutional crisis that would shake the very foundation of our democracy."
"We condemn this unprecedented overreach and call on you to uphold the Constitution by giving fair consideration, including timely hearings and votes, to the next nominee to the Supreme Court."
Expressing a similar reaction is Geoffrey R. Stone, Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago. He writes that the Republican decision not to consider any justice nominee is "unconscionable."
"If they carry through on this threat, it will be directly incompatible with their solemn responsibilities under the United States Constitution. It would be an action morally and legally on a par with the Southern Manifesto," Stone argues.
Common Cause this week also launched a website, senatedoyourjob.org, to let users see where their senators stand on allowing Obama to appoint a nominee since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia left the nation's highest court evenly split.
Presidential hopefuls Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have also expressed outrage over the Republican efforts to block a nominee.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.