Parties draw battle lines around SCOTUS nominee, who remains silent

Merrick Garland, the mild mannered Supreme Court nominee whom Republicans have vowed to ignore, met with Democratic leaders Thursday but offered no comments to gathered throngs of reporters.

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
Judge Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama’s choice to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, sits during a meeting with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, March 17, 2016.

It was Day One for the traditional courtesy calls to senators, but there's not much about Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination that has adhered to tradition — or courtesy.

A day after his selection set the battle lines in a major fight over the court, President Barack Obama's choice to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia met only with Democratic leaders on Thursday — steering clear of the Republican leader who has vowed the Senate will ignore Garland's nomination and wait for the next president to fill the seat.

For Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, the Capitol visit was a stunt "orchestrated" by the White House, his spokesman said. But for Democrats, it was just the opening salvo in a public campaign to make Garland the best-known victim of Republican obstruction and a household name in every election battleground state.

Garland met separately with Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. After the meeting with Leahy, the mild mannered jurist faced a throng of reporters and clicking cameras, but said nothing.

Said Leahy: "I talked to him about where the hurdles are, and I talked to him about what I thought would happen if we actually follow the oath that we've all taken to uphold the Constitution."

Reid also said he braced the judge for the bombardment ahead.

"I just told him to be himself," Reid said. "I think he's willing to take whatever they can throw at him."

More than a dozen Senate Democrats stood in front of the Supreme Court, using the telegenic backdrop to underscore their calls for Republicans to give Garland a hearing. Democrats cited polling showing public support for Senate consideration of the nomination, and eagerly linked the court fight to Donald Trump — the volatile front-runner for the GOP nomination and a source of embarrassment for the Republican establishment.

"If Republicans stand in the way and refuse to do their job, it will only be because they want Donald Trump to pick the next nominee," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

The success of the Democrats' plans hinge in part on rallying their grass roots to the cause — a task complicated by Obama's nomination of a moderate with little public record on many issues valued by the progressive wing of the party.

In an interview with NPR, the president said he found the Republicans' argument that the electorate should weigh in "puzzling."

"Well, in fact the American people did decide — back in 2012 when they elected me president of the United States with sufficient electoral votes," Obama said.

Liberal and labor groups planned events next week, when the Senate is out of session and senators are back home, pressuring Republicans on their home turf. The events include teachers holding rallies in Cleveland, Cincinnati and Lima, Ohio, aimed at Sen. Rob Portman; union members mobilizing in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia and targeting Sen. Patrick Toomey, and activists attending town hall and other Iowa re-election events staged by Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley.

Republicans prepared their defense.

One Nation — run by Steven Law, a former McConnell chief of staff and the head the GOP-aligned American Crossroads super PAC — was beginning 10 days of television advertising on Friday in Des Moines, Iowa, aimed at supporting Grassley, a key opponent of confirming an Obama nominee.

The ad says an Obama appointment to the court could "radically transform" laws governing land ownership, gun rights and religious freedom and says, "Tell Senator Grassley, keep fighting for the right of Iowans to decide the Supreme Court's future."

The conservative Judicial Crisis Network said it will begin a two-week, $2 million TV ad campaign on Monday supporting GOP senators in Iowa, New Hampshire and Ohio and pressuring Democrats from Colorado, North Dakota and West Virginia.

Also, groups including the Tea Party Patriots and the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List were planning to send members to town hall meetings in states like Iowa and New Hampshire to show their backing for blocking consideration of Garland and were organizing phone calls to lawmakers' offices to register support.

Still, Republicans were mindful of the risks of closing their doors to this nominee, while past Supreme Court candidates had paid visits shortly after their nomination with little controversy.

McConnell tried to pre-empt the spectacle by talking with Garland by phone Wednesday. He wished him well, his office said. Grassley, who also talked to Garland, agreed to meet with him — just not immediately.

A growing group of senators took that approach, including Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona.

"I meet with anybody, and that would include him," Flake said.

Flake said if a Democrat such as Hillary Clinton were elected president in November, he would want the Senate to consider Garland's nomination during a postelection, lame duck session because "between him and somebody that a President Clinton might nominate, I think the choice is clear."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to