Across Minnesota, people continue to speak out against Senate Republicans’ refusal to do their job and give Judge Garland a hearing and vote. From business leaders, to elected officials, to local newspapers, Minnesotans are supporting Senators Klobuchar and Franken as they call to keep partisanship out of the Supreme Court—and to give Judge Garland a fair hearing and a timely vote.
Minneapolis Star Tribune: Garland And The American People Deserve A Senate Hearing And Vote (Editorial). “Americans do have a voice: They elected Obama (twice), as well as members of the Judiciary Committee, and most voters no doubt trusted that their representatives would respect the importance of the nation’s highest federal court. But McConnell and his cohorts seem intent on disregarding the Constitution, however they may interpret it. Unless the political gamesmanship gives way to leadership, the weakened court could reach 4-4 decisions, setting no legal precedent, for a year or more.”
Fergus Falls Journal: Supreme Court nominee deserves a hearing (Editorial). “The strategy of waiting until the next president could result in a liberal president nominating a dyed-in-the-wool liberal judge in 2017. Surely, McConnell, Rubio and Grassley would rather see a moderate than a clear liberal. Garland, for instance, sided with President George W. Bush on detaining suspected enemies at the Guantanamo Bay prison without the right to challenge their imprisonment. He also has had rulings on the other side of Guantanamo Bay issues, too, showing he is discerning, not political. He adheres to his interpretation. He is even-handed. The Senate Republicans should give Garland the hearing he deserves. Without a doubt, there is precedent for that step.”
Minneapolis Star Tribune: U.S. Senate's judicial stalling harms federal courts (Editorial). “It’s doubtful that the authors of the U.S. Constitution’s elegant and — until lately — effective three-way balance of federal power contemplated what’s unfolding this year. The Senate’s failure to even consider confirming President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee is by itself a lapse in constitutional duty and an extreme exercise in partisanship. But Judge Merrick Garland isn’t the only Obama nominee to the courts who’s getting a cold shoulder. A near-complete shutdown of judicial confirmations seems to be in effect — one that could have consequences so serious that statesmen as reasonable as former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and former Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman warned in Time magazine last week that a constitutional crisis could be unfolding.”
SC Times: Don’t wait to fill Scalia’s vacancy (Editorial). “There is no justification for Senate Republicans blocking the process to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia last weekend. The U.S. Constitution requires the president to put forth a nominee. It requires the Senate to consider the candidate and approve or reject.”
Sen. Al Franken: “Franken said he was ‘predisposed’ to backing Garland but said that he would wait until public hearings were held before making a final decision. ‘I would withhold saying how I’d vote. The hearings serve a real purpose and I would want to go through the hearing. I’m very predisposed both because of his reputation and, frankly, because of the conversation we had today. But I would want to go through the hearings,’ Franken said after meeting with Garland on Wednesday morning.”
Abir Sen, CEO of Gravie: “As a healthcare IT startup, we need to have clarity and stability on the legal front. A vacancy on the Supreme Court potentially puts that in jeopardy, and could dampen innovation in one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy.”