Judge Merrick Garland

[tRidiot]

So... it may not be a true strike, but it could be interpreted as suspicious, as it relates to his feelings on gun rights. But we really don't know the thought process, so I don't know.

I honestly don't trust anyone Obama would put up, though, so I'm willing to take the chance and pass. Although when Hillary gets in there, you can damn sure bet she's going to go more full-court-press against the 2nd Amendment than Obama has.

 

[KOPBET]

...Garland's actions as a judge, as they relate to the 2nd Amendment?

Not stellar. But that has nothing to do with my post. If you're going to convince anyone (such as Senator *********) of your argument it pays to at least be truthful.

 

[Poke78]

Not stellar. But that has nothing to do with my post. If you're going to convince anyone (such as Senator *********) of your argument it pays to at least be truthful.

OK, let's try this on for truth: Judge Garland would prefer to hide behind process than to stand on principle. That's what I see in this specific choice.

 

[MadDogs]

If one is a “single issue voter” in regard to that “shall not be infringed” part of the Second Amendment; based on Merrick Garland’s record he is not a good choice.

Correct. The case was not reheard en banc; it went straight to the Supreme Court.

Timeline is important. This was after the DC circuit ruled in favor of the individual’s 2A right that Garland voted with the minority to grant the rehearing en blanc.

 

[gerhard1]

Sen. Inhofe's response:

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the vacancy on the Supreme Court and the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to fill the spot. As your representative in Washington, I appreciate hearing your concerns.



Since the devastating loss of Justice Antonin Scalia in February, much controversy has surrounded who his successor will be. On March 16, 2016, President Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland to the position, but it is important for the upcoming presidential election to be about citizens like you deciding the direction the Court will take.



We have seen time and again that when President Obama is unable to get his liberal agenda through Congress he has turned to executive actions and agency rulemaking to implement his priorities. These regulations and actions are now making their way through our courts, and many of them will be heard by the Supreme Court within the next year or two.



The President and Senate Democrats want the Senate to confirm someone who will uphold these executive overreaches, but the American people elected a Republican-majority Senate to oppose President Obama's policies. With the balance of the Supreme Court now at stake, the choice to fill this vacancy will shape our nation for at least the next generation. Americans just like you are the ones who will bear the burden of these court decisions; therefore, you should have a say on who fills Justice Scalia's vacancy.



Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have made clear that the Senate will not hold hearings on a nomination until the next president has been elected. While the president has a Constitutional duty to nominate a justice, the Senate also has the Constitutional duty to provide "advice and consent," and it is fully within the purview of this body to withhold that consent while completely fulfilling our Constitutional duties.


I assure you, I alongside my Republican colleagues, will stand up and refuse to confirm a nomination in an election cycle. Thank you for taking the time to let me know your thoughts on this issue.


Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future regarding matters that are important to you. If you are interested in keeping up with my work in the Senate, I encourage you to sign up for my newsletter. You can do that by visiting: http://www.inhofe.senate.gov/newsletter/sign-up.






Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe
United States Senator

 

[gerhard1]

Old thread, but I will just say that in view of his performance as AG, I am happy Garland did not make it to the US Supreme Court.

 

[sherrick13]

Garland is a commie snake

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

No need to be disparaging snakes...

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

No need to be disparaging snakes...

That's true. They took a hard enough hit in Genesis ...

Woody