Republican Gardner of Colorado said in March of that year that “the next election is very soon, and the stakes are very high.”
When asked about his 2016 comments on Wednesday amid President Donald Trump’s attempt to fill a vacant Supreme Court seat less than two months before the election, Gardner did not respond when contacted by CNN.
“If you don’t see my statement, I’ll send it to you,” Gardner said as they walked over the senators’ elevator.
The statement, however, did not say anything about his past status, instead noting that if a qualified nominee supported him, he would now come forward: “I will vote to confirm.”
With Senate Republicans and White House Supreme Court races raging after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, many struggled to find a compromise in their support to confirm Trump’s nomination on the eve of the election, with their firm opposition to even considering the nomination they made. Democratic president eight months ago. Party leaders are hinting at a different party formation in Washington, arguing that while the same party controls both the Senate and the White House, it is not the norm in an election year with a divided government like in 2001.
But four years ago, the Republican Party did not deliver much of a message, as they have repeatedly insisted for months – that voters who can effectively choose the next Supreme Court candidate and defend the Senate majority leader. Mitch McConnell refused to fill the vacancy, which was later filled in 2017 by Trump’s choice of Neil Gorsch.
Iowa Sen. “In the midst of the crucial election, the American people have a say in this important decision that will affect our country for years to come,” Johnny Ernst said in March 2001. Any special nominations; Instead this is about giving a voice to the American people. ”
On Wednesday, Ernst declined to answer a question on whether voters should have a voice at the Ginsburg seat, with a reporter walking silently saying she had asked three times about his 2016 statement as he left the Capitol.
Others, such as Ernest, who are in a difficult re-election race, are reluctant to engage when asked to reconcile their past by endorsing Trump’s move now.
“People were waiting for me,” said Georgia Sen. David Perdue, who did not answer questions for the third time this week about his 2016 statement not to hold a hearing on Obama candidate Merrick Garland. “Presidential Election.”
Montana Sen. Steve Dines, a Republican from the state that Trump won by more than 20 points in 2016, is the Democratic Govt. Steve is in a tight race with Bullock and is making it clear he is behind the Trump candidate, who is scheduled to be named Saturday evening.
But in 2016, Dennis said: “The American people have already begun voting on who will be president, and their voices should be reflected in the process that will have a lasting impact on their nation.”
Asked about past statements on Wednesday, Dennis said the president has a “constitutional obligation to appoint justice – the Senate can either confirm or reject the nominee.” “In 2016, Republicans rejected” liberal justice, “and now that Trump has made his decision, I will be in support of that Rs. ”
“There is a very clear difference right now in terms of what kind of justice should be in the Supreme Court,” Dennis said. “I support the liberals, my opponent supports the liberals.”
When asked why voters shouldn’t say, Dane replied: “They had a choice: they chose President Trump and the Republican Senate.”
In a neck-and-neck race with Democrat Cal L. Cunningham in North Carolina, Sen. Thom Tillis said Trump is not a “lame-duck” president like Obama.
But in a 2016 comment, Tillis said: “It’s about theory, not the person,” and the American people must have a “voice” to determine the direction of the court. Asked about the statement, Tillis said Wednesday: “We knew President Obama was walking out the door. We were months away from the election. But at the end of the day, we now support moving the process forward.”
Democrats argued for a confirmation vote in an election year four years ago
Republicans aren’t just forced to compromise on their past status. Democrats, too, spent months in 2016 with demands to fill the vacancies, warning of the dangers of having only eight seats in the Supreme Court.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said four years ago that “the business of the American people is not complete every day without the Ninth Justice.”
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchter, a Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee who appealed for an up-and-down vote on Obama’s nominee four years ago, said the two circumstances are quite different.
“You can’t have one set of rules for a Democratic president and another set of rules for a Republican,” he said.
Another member of the committee, Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, also criticized the Republicans for refusing to vote in favor in the 2016 election year.
Asked to compromise on the two positions, Blumanthal said: “We argued that instead of waiting nine months before the election, a seat should be filled, for a whole year. Elections. Literally, people are voting. They are voting in seven states right now. Circumstances are just completely different. ”
Democrats argue that never in history has a Supreme Court justice election been confirmed since July, the issue Schumer raised on the Senate floor on Wednesday.
Presiding Officer – GOP Sen. In an exchange with Kelly Loffler, Georgia fought hard to keep herself in the seat – Schumer asked if there was any ancestor to confirm the nomination between July and November in the presidential election year.
The content of the Senate Secretary does not show such an example, Lofler said.
Republicans argue that nice issues are serious about which parties are controlling the White House and Senate in the free time of the election year and validate their actions to block Garland in 2016 and move forward with his nomination. He says only 15 times in history has a Supreme Court vacancy come up in an election year and the president has nominated a candidate. Seven of those 15 happened when the Senate was controlled by the opposition. Of these, only two nominees were confirmed, the last being 1888.
And the White House and Senate confirmed the nominees eight times from the same party, seven times. Abe Fortus was not the only person confirmed for the post of Chief Justice in the late 1960s, faced corruption charges and his nomination was withdrawn.
“With this one bizarre exception, we have now failed to confirm any Senate candidate in the circumstances we are facing,” McConnell said Monday. “Historical parables are overwhelming and they move in one direction. If our democratic allies should claim that they are outraged, they can only be outraged by the simple facts of American history.”
GOP’s 2016 message
But, as McConnell pointed out in 2016 how he differentiated one-party rule from a divided government, the GOP leader himself insisted four years ago that it would be up to voters to decide the direction of the court in November.
“The forthcoming justice could fundamentally change the direction of the Supreme Court and have an impact on our country,” McConnell said on the floor in March 2016. “So, of course, the American people should have a saying in this matter. The court pointed out.”
San Marco Rubio, who ran for president in 2016, told reporters at the Capitol shortly after leaving office that he opposed Garland, adding: “I don’t think we’ve seen any nominees in the last year. Should grow. This is the term of the president. I would say that if he were a Republican president. ”
Asked about past statements, Rubio told CNN this week: “The main thing here is: if the president nominates someone the way he approves, and they put someone who I support, I will not vote against the judges. . ” Support. It’s as simple as that. ”
“No, I’m not.” When Rubio was asked if he resisted his past position. The senator drew attention to a comment he made that year on NBC’s “Meet the Press” where he said the president should not nominate anyone in his last year, especially in his second term, although he did not mention the second term in a conversation with reporters at Capitol.
Some Republicans have different reasons for reversing their stance, including Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsay Graham, who promised in 2016 and 2018 not to go ahead with the 2020 nomination. Evil changed after the Supreme Court fight, which in 2018 confirmed Brett Cavanahon.
Sen., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and facing re-election in Texas. Voting for voters to guide the court was an “important principle,” John Corney said.
“This is really an important principle,” Kornen said in March 2011. “In the selection of the next president of the United States, voters must make that decision and ensure that their voices are heard instead of just 100 members.” Senate. ”
But when asked about the situation this week, Kornen said he took the opinion “because President Obama’s term was limited.”
Some have recently paused about filling vacancies.
The chairman of the committee at the time, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley told CNN late July this year that he did not think the Senate should move on to the upcoming vacancy. “My position is that if I were chairman of the committee I would not be able to move forward with it.”
But earlier this week, in the days following Ginsberg’s death, Grassley now sided with the party’s decision to move forward with his nominee.
Asked what has changed between now and July, Grassley told CNN on Wednesday that he is not the chairman of the committee and said it is ongoing.
“If Graham goes ahead with the hearing, he can expect me to be there, and I have a responsibility to be there.”
Asked about not voting on principle, Grassley said, looking at past concerns about pushing forward this year: “I’m going to vote on the nominee’s eligibility.”
Danila Mora and Dominic Torres of CNN contributed.
.
