POLITICS/LEGAL (National): United States Supreme Court, filling of vacancy?: Editorial, "GOP obstructionism gone haywire: No new Supreme Court justices until next Republican president" ....
* Los Angeles Times (editorial): "GOP obstructionism gone haywire: No new Supreme Court justices until next Republican president?" - From the LAT:
After Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died this year, President Obama went about nominating a successor, as required by the Constitution. But Senate Republicans — including John McCain of Arizona — resisted, insisting that the vacancy should be filled by the president chosen by voters in November. They invoked (or fabricated) a “rule” that a president’s right to have his Supreme Court nominees considered by the Senate lapses in an election year.
Now that Hillary Clinton seems likely to win the election, however, some Republicans are changing their tune. This week, McCain promised that “we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up.” Huh?
It was a reminder of just how unprincipled Republicans have been in refusing to bring the court up to strength. This fight has been all about partisan advantage, and if that means the court must leave some important issues unresolved because of a 4-4 deadlock, so be it.
McCain’s outrageous threat also highlighted a longer-term problem: the bipartisan repudiation of the idea that the Senate should defer to a president’s choice of a Supreme Court justice so long as the nominee is well qualified, untarnished by accusations of personal wrongdoing and within the mainstream of legal thought.
In 2005 . . . . . . . .
And now McCain threatens to . . . . . . . .
The Constitution does provide for a role for the Senate in the appointment of judges, including Supreme Court justices. But senators abuse that authority when they reflexively reject or block a nominee from a president of the opposite party ..............