SCOTUS reveals Mark’s partisan colors

Yesterday, Mark Kelly announced his marching orders from Chuck Schumer: The Senate should not fulfill its constitutional duty to advise and consent on the president’s Supreme Court nominee, and instead wait for what he believes will be a nominee picked by a liberal Democrat president.

In saying he wants to wait for a Democrat-picked Supreme Court nominee, Kelly is signaling he will support a liberal that would allow abortion up to the moment of birth, take away Second Amendment rights, give illegal immigrants unlimited rights and taxpayer-paid benefits, and increase regulation on small businesses.  

What’s more, Chuck Schumer and Democrats doubled down on their threat that “nothing is off the table”—including packing the Supreme Court. This radical idea has taken root in the mainstream of the Democrat Party, yet Mark Kelly won’t say if he agrees with his Party’s plans to totally destroy our third branch of government.

Make no mistake: This is now the defining issue of the election. By siding with his Party, Mark Kelly has shown his true colors.

SCOTUS Background:

  • If a president and the Senate agree on a Supreme Court nominee, timing has never stopped them. By tradition, only when the voters have elected a president and a Senate majority from different parties has the fact of a looming presidential election mattered. When there is no dispute between the branches, there is no need to ask the voters to resolve one. (National Review)
  • The Biden Rule: In 1992, then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Joe Biden argued that President George H.W. Bush should not announce a nominee to fill a Supreme Court vacancy because there was a “divided government” reflecting the absence of a “nationwide consensus” on constitutional philosophy. (WSJ)
    • The Biden Rule was the guiding principle behind the 2016 decision to not consider the nomination of Merrick Garland.
    • The Biden Rule does not fit the current circumstances because there is no divided government. In fact, voters expanded the Republican Senate Majority in 2018, thus giving a clear mandate to the Senate to fulfill their role to advise and consent on nominees.

By the Numbers:

  • 29 – The number of times in our history when a Supreme Court vacancy has occurred in an election year or before a presidential inauguration. In every single one of those 29 instances, the president moved forward with a nomination.
  • 10 – The number of instances of Supreme Court vacancies in a presidential election year or post-election nomination when the White House and the Senate are held by different parties.  In those instances, history supports the idea that the person who wins the presidential election should decide the nomination.
  • 27 – The average number of days Supreme Court nominees have been confirmed, rejected, or withdrawn from the time the nomination arrives in the Senate.
  • 50 – Justice Ginsburg’s nomination took only 50 days from the announcement of her nomination to the floor vote.
  • 19 – Justice Stevens’ confirmation took only 19 days from the announcement of his nomination to his confirmation.
  • 30 – The number of Supreme Court Justices in the last 100 years that were confirmed in less than 42 days from the time of their nomination.

By: Caroline Anderegg