Sunday, April 3, 2016
Scalia’s replacement could mean an equal tug of war
Last week
the President came out to announce his nomination for the recently opened seat
on the Supreme Court, due to Justice Antonin Scalia’s passing. The nominee,
Merrick Garland is the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit. Based on what is being said, it seems that
Garland would be an excellent choice as the next justice on the Supreme Court.
However, it seems that the GOP does not believe so and there are many strongly
worded opinions as to whom we should be seeing in that seat.
As a more
moderate candidate, Republicans fear that they will lose the “upper hand” when
it comes to the conservative v. liberal decisions made in the Supreme Court.
They may be on to something though, as it seems that Garland’s record leans
towards the more liberal/moderate side. With negative numbers reflecting a more
liberal stance and positive ones representing the more conservative, The
Washington Post puts Garland at about a – 0.5. The Washington Post describes
Garland’s ideology to lie between Justice Breyer, who is almost at -1, and Justice
Roberts, who is past 1 but not quite at 2[1].
Bustle.com
published an article, “7 Reasons Merrick
Garland's Women's Rights Record — Or Lack Thereof — Should Worry You” which shed some
light on some of the issues around Garland’s nomination[2]. More importantly, the
article gives us 7 reasons why he might not be the proper candidate for the
job. The article is a bit misleading to some as it only lists issues that have
not been addressed by Garland. Ever. Can we really say we can’t confide in
someone because of this, if he has yet to confront these issues?
These
assumptions are of course, just assumptions as one could find it incredibly
difficult to both assess an individuals actions, to determine where there
political views lie, and make claims on situations that have yet to happen.
What I believe should be taken into consideration is the fact that President
Obama, a just man, confides enough in Mr. Garland to nominate him for a seat in
the SCOTUS. Yes, ideally we do want to see more female Justices, but can we not
settle for a moderate-liberal candidate? Personally, I don’t feel that the
gender of the candidate matters as long as the views and positions embrace the
female population in order to better serve us.
Luisa Ibner, MWPC Intern
[1]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/03/30/new-data-show-how-liberal-merrick-garland-really-is/
[2]
http://www.bustle.com/articles/148469-7-reasons-merrick-garlands-womens-rights-record-or-lack-thereof-should-worry-you
