Advise and Consent

The only role that the Senate has to play in the vacancy on the Supreme Court is an advisory role after the nomination has been made.

Nowhere in the Constitution does is say that the president has to consult the Senate before making a nomination. In fact, Washington set the precedent regarding the advise and consent clause, when he decided, after having involved the Senate in treaty negotiations, that he would negotiate treaties and the Senate could simply vote for or against it.

This applies to the current debate over the Supreme Court nominee. Bush does not need to kow-tow to the Senate Democrats and consult with them before he nominates a new justice. The Democrats simply want to try to force him to do so because the courts are the last beacon of hope for the liberal policies that the Democrats want to see enacted. The Democrats know that they do not have the ideas that resonate with the American public and so they need to try to get judges on the courts who will legislate from the bench.

Bush and the Republicans should not give into the Democrats and should not consult them before a nomination is made. The Democrats should then abide by their deal over the filibuster and either vote for or against the nominee. Does anyone believe that if the roles were reversed the Democrats would consult the Republicans? I don't think so.

Posted by Nathan Melton at July 18, 2005 12:42 PM