McConnell Says GOP-Controlled Senate Would Block Biden Supreme Court Nominee in 2024

Should the Senate consider a Supreme Court nominee put forward by a president of the opposite party?

  • 159
    Michael J

    #MoscowMitch has no conscience so he writes his own rules as he goes along. He’s a reason the GOP has become unhinged. Without a moral compass the only hope the GOP/Trump Party has of winning future elections is to steal them. Being the party of Wealthy Corporations and Individuals and the “poorly educated” as Fascist Herr Trump refers to his minions only gets one so far. The GOP is nearing the end of the line.

  • 537

    Be consistent. If it's okay to cram thru a republican presidents nomination no matter the circumstances, it absolutely must be at least considered if a democrat does it. It really looks bad if you don't. At the very least, consider that. If the person isn't fit for the position, say so. If they are, so that. Saying no consideration will take place is a cowards way out.

  • 85

    It is very clear what the GOP will do. They will block any Democratic nomination to the Supreme Court or any federal court. It is their form of judicial activism. It is totally reactionary. They are acting on behalf of their donors, cleverly drawing attention away from it by exploiting wedge issues. Their ultimate goal is to avoid changing their policies to appeal to more voters.

  • 58

    McConnell is admitting to the world that he hates Democrats and believes that only republicans are fit to rule (he doesn’t know how to govern). He is also officially declaring that he remains a hypocrite and doesn’t believe in fairness.

  • 222

    Yes, it is their constitutional duty, something Moscow Mitch does not care about.

  • 1,696

    Yes! The courts are supposed to be non political...not be assholes and follow the rules of law. Just to be a juror seems to be stricter than to be a justice! That's not how it supposed to work! It's not 'my way or it's the highway'! The GQP is keeping the trumplican dumpster fire burning and as far as I'm concerned, along with others...they need to be thrown into that fire. Moscow Mitch started the fire burning before the trump got in and it's been raging ever since. The fire needs to be put out before our country can become whole again. This country needs to heal! We are so divided as our democracy languishes on the edge! Do you want to go on like this? Are you okay with this? Do you not care if there's no true justice in this country? Would you want to go before a judge who's prejudice...biased or politically motivated? We need to expel all GQP...starting with Mitch! We need to get back real politics and true justice.

  • 204

    Supreme Court judges should not be a political goal. Judges should be chosen for their record of fairness and competence as a judge.

  • 741

    With Mitch McConnell’s behavior slamming through a supreme court judge two weeks ago in trumps last term and then saying he’s going to put up a fight. Any appointment by JoE Biden and Republican candidate in Florida talking to a colleague which was taped about having his opponent killed by Russian operatives which he went on and on about demonstrates totally did the republican party is no longer in a race for the bottom they are at the bottom. It’s absolutely pathetic republican party has become Nazi party of America. This is not a joke it really has and it’s time it was broken up. I invite any Republican That is sick of this crazy nonsense from the crazy man Donald Trump on down to join the democratic party and it’s broad umbrella of beliefs and goals to move this country forward.

  • 33

    If the nominee is qualified, they should be confirmed. Do what is good for the nation, not party politics.

  • 41.8k

    REPOST: I guess I am having difficulty reconciling how a democratic republic is supposed to work with how our government is currently operating. In any representative democracy, representatives are elected to represent the will of the people. Our Country’s representatives all swear an oath to defend the Constitution and the Country as their highest purpose and defining reason for them to serve in our legislature. The Country in this case is, by definition, the all of us. … … … There is no oath for legislators to just serve themselves, their political party, their benefactors or even just their constituents - none of these things define the nature of their sworn duty to our country, their service in the offices that they hold or the privileges that they afford to themselves in lieu of the public trust. NONE. … … … So, just how is it that the Congressional Republican Senate can just ignore the overwhelming will of the people because honoring the will of the people may give political points to an opposing party? Aren’t they all in office to honor the will of the people? Isn’t honoring the will of the people a paramount responsibly of the people’s elected representatives? … … … All of Biden’s initiatives are supported by a majority of the voters including majorities of Republican, Independent and Democratic voters alike. The HR.1 legislation is supported by over a 60 point spread in WV; supported by 81% of Democratic voters, 79% of Independents and 76% of Republican voters. Politicians benefiting from dark money donations will not support this bill out of their own self interests because of the limitations that HR.1 imposes on dark money donations. Again, these representatives have the paramount duty to honor the collective will of the people and are not elected to protect their cash flow from benefactors. Representing the people’s will - isn’t that how a representative democracy is supposed to work? … … … How can a political party’s leadership, representing the minority of the people, simply declare that they will stop all of the legislative packages sponsored by representatives of the majority as well as being broadly supported the majority of the minority party’s own voters? Just who does the minority party’s representatives actually represent? It is not the will of the people nor the will of their own voters. Is this not putting the will of these legislators over the will of the people of this country and the will of the people that they purport to represent? How can this be tolerated in a democratic republic, a representative democracy, or any form of democracy? Isn’t this action alone a constitutional violation of their oath’s of office and their sworn duty? … … … Just how can the will of the governing supersede the will of the governed in a democracy? Do some of the governing feel that they are somehow some form of Royalty whose purpose is to placate the unfortunate, uniformed serfs that they ‘represent’ and ignore their desires and needs? Just who the f@¢k do they think they are? … … … Why should a minority party which is ignoring the will of the people for their own interests be able to require a 20 plus point spread in Senate voting to pass legislation supported broadly by the people with a 60 point spread? None of our elected official are required to win their elections with a 20 point spread - so why should the overwhelming will of the people even conceivably be allowed to be thwarted by a political party acting in bad faith, solely for the purpose of attaining and retaining political power and their substantial perks of office? I would think that the will of the people should be much more important that the will of a minority of legislators who do not find political advantage in carrying out their duties to the people, or that arcane Senate rules which allow a minority party to overwhelm the majority’s will is somehow more important than their primary duty to represent the all of us. They were not elected to let an abuse of Senate norms excuse them from their primary Constitutional duties. … … … People generally mistrust the Congress, complain about perpetual gridlock and the continued reduced performance of our country in education, life expectancy, homelessness, healthcare, hunger, incarceration rates, social justice, poverty and world status. These are all trends which started when Republican’s sold the public on the failed promises of trickle down economics and Gingrich regimented the House to block-vote and essentially declare war on the Democratic Party for the sole purpose of winning elections by any means possible. All of these things together explain Congressional gridlock and the great damages done to the very foundation that supports this country, our people. It would not have been this way had we insisted that our legislators took a fifth grade civics class and learned how a representative democracy is supposed to work and if we collectively demanded that they honor their duty to our country, their oath’s of office and hold them all to account for spewing of disinformation to convince us otherwise. … … … We have a lot of work to do.

  • 21

    It should always be considered. Garland should have had a fair chance to at least be interviewed/questioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee. I was in support of this with him and Justice Barrett. We are paying Congress to do their job not play games. If after the questioning they are not confirmed then so be it but unfortunately it is all about whom has power at the time.

  • 21

    The job of the Senate is to ‘advise and consent’ on candidates put forth by the President for various positions. There is no mention of party consideration or whether or not it’s an election year.

  • 202

    The people chose them to DO SOMETHING!!! Not just whine & not do their job!

  • 468

    What GQP controlled Senate? Like hell.

  • 87

    I hope that McConnell goes down in history as one of the worst Senate Majority leaders of all, and who is the most dangerous to our Democracy.

  • 890

    I feel that they should be at least given the benefit of doubt.

  • 35

    Yet they put in a Supreme Court justice 6 days before an election. But with 200+ plus wouldn't nominate one for Obama. This Republican party is no longer the party of Reagan, it's the party of racists.

  • 118

    They should always do that as long as the judge is qualified. What McConnell has done in the past and said he would do again is wrong! He should not be able to do that.

  • 388

    Sort of off-topic: No surprise here. Less than 24 hours after Manchin roughed out what he would support in terms of protecting voter rights and reducing the intentional attempts such as gerrymandering to skew election results away from the popular vote, Mitch McConnell already announced his opposition. Put a lot of thought into Manchin’s proposal, didn’t he? Well, at least he’s following through on his promise to 100% block Biden’s and Democrats’ initiatives. There is that. It’s his playbook during Obama’s presidency 2.0. By the way, he’s lying about the “fundamental idea.” The Constitution explicitly states that the fundamental idea is voters rights protections and that Congress has the duty to protect them by overriding States’ decisions about “how to run their elections” if voter rights are diluted. He’s also using fear tactics by waving a threat to the First Amendment without bothering to explain the detail of the threat which suggests to me that it’s nonsense and bullying pretending to be gravitas. Despicable, but consistent. “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced Thursday that he opposes the compromise on Democrats' sweeping voting rights bill proposed by Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). Why it matters: Voting legislation requires 60 votes to pass in the Senate. Without Republican support, it is unlikely to pass. Manchin is the sole Democratic senator who has not signed on to the "For the People Act," insisting that it's too partisan. The big picture: Manchin's proposed compromise includes banning partisan gerrymandering, requiring voter ID, having at least 15 consecutive days of early voting, and making Election Day a public holiday. Stacey Abrams, a leading Democratic voice on voting rights, said Thursday she would support the plan. What he's saying: "Senate Democrats seem to have reached a so-called 'compromise' election takeover among themselves. In reality, the plan endorsed by Stacey Abrams is no compromise," McConnell said. * "It still subverts the First Amendment to supercharge cancel culture and the left's name-and-shame campaign model. It takes redistricting away from state legislatures and hands it over to computers." * "And it still retains S. 1's rotten core: an assault on the fundamental idea that states, not the federal government, should decide how to run their own elections."

  • 61

    Moscow Mitch continues to degrade our democracy and the potential for bipartisan efforts by unlawfully refusing to consider Supreme Court nominees from non-Republican Presidents. Mitch needs to be removed from office.