Perhaps.
But at some point after the turn of the century, bipartisanship and compromise went out of the window, largely because of the work of McConnell and Ryan who refused to work with Obama on…anything. Just about all attempts at compromise on major legislation by the Democrats were rebuffed, and, of course, Garland was denied so much as a hearing, strictly on partisan grounds.
This is not good - and not just for the Democrats, but for the nation as a whole. Something like half the country is not conservative. Too much power on the right side will leave the left feeling angry and disenfranchised.*
Anyway, it seems entirely meet and just to me for the left, in general, to smack the right upside the head a few times with “let’s see how you like it!” Who knows, they might even learn! And, incidentally, bring back some balance to the national government.
Myself, I think the Supreme Court has too much importance, but that’s largely due to the extremely partisan nature of government in general. If we can return to the (relatively) bipartisan days of yore, I’d be delighted.
*obviously, the inverse is true; I’m just not aware of any attempt by the left to subvert the right’s participation in government.
Yes, it’s time to look for compromise. The first step in that is either for the next Republican president to face a vacancy to nominate Garland, or for Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to resign under a Democrat. If neither of those happens, then the Republicans are unwilling to compromise, and when one side won’t compromise, compromise can’t happen.
Saint Cad, it’s bad when the Republicans upend long-standing norms of democracy. It would also be bad if Democrats upended long-standing norms of democracy. Can you point to anyone in this thread who is suggesting that they should?
What Republicans did to Merrick Garland was wrong. But it should not be normalized. Democrats should make a point with one SCOTUS appointment. Give Trump an ultimatum: either nominate a justice acceptable to us(like Merrick Garland), or you get to see the seat remain empty for the rest of your Presidency. But if another comes up, the Democrats should treat that second nominee the way they want their nominees treated. We need to go back to the days of 97-3 confirmations for qualified judges.
In terms of pure politics, Democrats would not benefit from a “one party must have the White House and the Senate” to appoint justices rule. Republicans have a natural advantage in the Senate and the end result would likely be 9 conservative justices in 2033 or something. I have doubts that Democrats will win the Senate anytime in the next 20 years while holding the Presidency. And 2020 doesn’t look nearly as good as many Democrats think it does for the Senate.
A signal that the country is returning to some semblance of sanity would be Donald Trump getting tossed out of office in 2020. Until then, the Democrats should just play hardball in the manner that the Republicans have established.
And if Trump gets reelected in 2020, I daresay that will call for a serious recalibration of what America is and what it wants to be.
I have some bad news. It’s the norm. Any claim that we should “go back” relies on that norm being rebuilt. But there’s just no reason to think it will or even can be. There’s absolutely zero indication that the republican party has any intent to do anything but play hardball. They had a chance during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation to turn down a candidate accused of sexual assault who went on an insane conspiratory-laden partisan rant… And they didn’t. They stuck to their guns, forcing the nominee through.
Adding to this is the reality that throughout the Roberts court, it’s become increasingly clear that the supreme court is very much a partisan instrument, with countless critically important lawsuits, including lawsuits on how people vote, how people spend money on elections, and who can be struck from the voter rolls, decided on a 5-4 partisan split.
Would you consider any judge on the Federalist Society shortlist “qualified”? Because I certainly wouldn’t like to see any of them seated on the supreme court under any circumstances, because there’s a certain pattern you find in the verdicts reached by those judges, and I see no reason to believe that they are impartial or that they will vote in ways that benefit anyone but the rich, powerful, and republican.
It’s a shit rule. But we didn’t put it there, and we can’t unilaterally put it back. And if we do try to unilaterally put it back, we’re just going to get fucked harder.
If, say, Ginsburg dies, Merrick Garland would be a nominee that would push the Court to the right. Not as much as a Gorsuch, but replacing the left-most justice on SCOTUS with a moderate moves the whole court to the…right.
He could always nominate someone even more progressive. The point, in my opinion, is to right the wrong that the Republicans did in 2016 with Scalia’s seat. Putting Garland on the court makes the court the way it would have been if Obama had gotten his pick. Trump got his picks, fine. That’s his prerogative as President. I would expect the court to move to the right under a conservative President. But Obama was cheated of his pick, and that wrong should be righted. I know this isn’t what will happen, but it is what should happen. We don’t need to resort to Republican levels of indecency in retaliation, just right the wrong that was done.
I believe we should emulate our “noble” Republican opponents and brazenly announce that we aren’t going to approve ANY nominee of the Republican president no matter who he is.
I kind of want to see what would happen in the OP’s hypothetical. As far as political theater goes, it would be pretty entertaining. I find the idea of political “norms” quaint. It’s a scrub mentality. If the rules create a broken system then we should change the rules, but until then it would be silly to artificially self handicap.
Every time Garland is mentioned I continue to be amused. 20+ times in this thread alone - he’s not going to be on SCOTUS. There are just no circumstances where that will happen.
Even ignoring Garland, it is obvious the Republicans have no sense of shame ir integrity. Look at the things McConnell said during the work on the ACA, and then contrast with what they did on the AHCA. They are hypocrites and there is no point trying to play nice with them because they are just going to lie about Democrats anyway.
