Appointment of a New Supreme Court Justice

[W. Gray]

There are a lot of people complaining right now because the Senate is making noise about wanting to delay holding confirmation hearings for a new Supreme Court justice until after the elections in November.

These complainers say that by delaying, the Senate is not following the Constitution and will be denying Obama his Constitutional right to appoint a Supreme Court justice.

I say this is hog wash and these complainers do not know what they are talking about. They probably have not even bothered to read the Constitution.

The Constitution says that the President will nominate someone to be a justice. The Constitution then says that the Senate will offer advice and consent to the President concerning the nomination. If the Senate consents, then the person is the next Supreme Court justice. If the Senate does not consent by rejecting, then the President will have to punt.

The Constitution provides no time line for such an undertaking.

Under the Constitution and at his own speed, President Obama should and will offer up a nomination to the Supreme Court.

I believe that when the President sends his formal nomination to the Senate, the Senate will follow the Constitution to the letter.

As part of their advice and consent responsibility, the Senate will offer this advice to the President: "We will consider the nomination after the November 2016 elections."