[ad_1]
Ted Cruz he delved into the history books and, just in case, launched a plug for his own forthcoming book on the supreme court, while trying to justify Republican efforts to act quickly to vote on the election of Donald Trump for Ruth Bader’s successor. Ginsburg, reports Richard Luscombe.
“If you look at history, if you really look at what the precedent is, this has happened 29 times.”Said the Texas senator on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos, referring to vacancies in the Supreme Court during the election year.
“There is a big difference between whether the Senate is from the same party as the president or from a different party. When the Senate has been from the same party as the president, of the 29 times, those are 19 of them.
“Of those 19, the Senate has confirmed those nominees 17 times. So if the parties are the same, the Senate confirms the nominee.
“When the games are different, that has happened 10 times. Merrick Garland was one of them. Of those 10, the Senate has confirmed the nominees only twice. “
Cruz’s “precedent” argument makes Democratic critics uncomfortable, who point out that Republicans Successfully Detained Garland, Barack Obama’s Candidate After Antonin Scalia’s Death in 2016, for 10 months, denying him even a hearing. However, the same Republican majority in the Senate promises a vote to confirm Ginsburg’s successor before the end of the year.
But Cruz, who made sure to reference, twice, next month’s publication of his book One Vote Away: How A Single Supreme Court Seat Can Change History, insisted there was nothing partisan about it.
“It’s not just your party, my party,” he said. “It’s a matter of checks and balances. For a supreme court nomination to advance, it is necessary to have the president and the Senate. In this case, the American people voted. They elected Donald Trump ”.
Cruz also argued that a ninth judge was needed in case the November elections resulted in a contentious legal battle, similar to Bush versus Gore in 2000 that ended with the Supreme Court installing the Republican.
“We need a full court on election day, given the high probability that we will see litigation going to court“Said Cruz, who was part of the Republican legal team in 2000 and is one of Trump’s potential nominees.
“We need a supreme court that can give a definitive answer for the country.”
