President Barack Obama is challenging Republicans to live up to their avowed adherence to the Constitution and agree to vote on his nominee to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. A key Republican is leaving the door open to taking the first step.
Despite widespread GOP insistence that he leave the decision to the next president, Obama said Tuesday he had no intention of abdicating his responsibilities before leaving office early next year. He chidingly told the Senate he expects “them to do their job as well.”
“The Constitution is pretty clear about what’s supposed to happen now,” Obama said before returning to Washington from California.
Fallout from Scalia’s unexpected death overshadowed Obama’s two days of summitry with Southeast Asian leaders. Obama pledged to nominate a candidate “indisputably” qualified, but Republican leaders have threatened to refuse to hold hearings or a vote on his pick to replace the conservative Scalia.
Yet there were hints that at least some Republicans might come around. Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said he would wait “until the nominee is [named] before I would make any decision” about holding hearings, boosting White House hopes for getting a third justice confirmed on Obama’s watch.
With the looming nomination creating ripples in the presidential campaign, Obama sought to broaden his argument by calling the dispute emblematic of years of escalating partisan hostilities over judicial nominations. He lamented a new normal in which “everything is blocked” even when there’s no ideological or substantive disagreement — and conceded that Democrats are not blameless
“This would be a good moment for us to rise above it,” Obama said.
Since Scalia’s unexpected death at a Texas ranch over the weekend, White House lawyers and advisers have been scrambling to identify potential replacements, while also devising a strategy to get a nominee confirmed.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he doesn’t think Obama should put a candidate forward. The Kentucky senator joined several Republicans up for re-election in declaring that Obama should let voters in November weigh in on the direction of the court through their vote for president.
Obama rejected that notion, insisting he will put forward a replacement and believes the Senate will have “plenty of time” to give the nominee a fair hearing and a vote. Democrats say Obama has every right and a constitutional duty to fill vacancies on the court until he leaves office next January.
The pace of judicial confirmations always slows in presidential election years, thanks to reluctance by the party out of power in the White House to give lifetime tenure to their opponents’ picks. In the past, lawmakers have sometimes informally agreed to halt hearings on lower court nominations during campaign season. But Obama argued that “the Supreme Court’s different.”
McConnell has shown no signs of shifting his opposition, and several lawmakers facing heated elections have backed him up. But the party may still be searching for a strategy.
The White House has been looking for cracks in the Republican opposition as it deliberates on a nominee, and Grassley’s remarks to home-state reporters offered the first signs of hope.
If Republicans indicate they may hold hearings, Obama would have greater reason to name a “consensus candidate,” a moderate nominee that Republicans would be hard-pressed to reject. If there’s virtually no chance of Republicans bending, Obama might pick a nominee who galvanizes Democratic support and fires up interest groups in the election year.
Obama would not tip his hand — much. He said he’d pick someone that would pass muster for honor and integrity even among ideological opponents.
He would not comment on whether he would consider appointing a candidate during a congressional recess, a last-ditch maneuver that would inflame partisanship in Congress.
If Senate Republicans hold fast to their vow not to confirm anyone Obama nominates, the Supreme Court will operate with eight justices — not just for the rest of this court term, but for most of the next one as well. High Court terms begin in October, and the 80 or so cases argued in the course of a term typically are decided by early summer.
The court would be unable to issue rulings on any issue in which the justices split 4-4.