Romney Supports Floor Vote on Trump’s SCOTUS Nominee
“I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”
Utah Sen. Mitt Romney has come aroung to support a floor vote on President Donald Trump’s SCOTUS nominee.
Romney did not say that he will definitely vote for the nominee. He supports the floor vote:
“I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications,” the Utah Republican said in a statement.
My statement regarding the current Supreme Court vacancy: pic.twitter.com/6YO0dPWWXc
— Senator Mitt Romney (@SenatorRomney) September 22, 2020
This means only Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins are the only holdouts.
Collins said the November presidential winner should fill the vacancy left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“Given the proximity of the presidential election, however, I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election. In fairness to the American people, who will either be re-electing the President or selecting a new one, the decision on a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court should be made by the President who is elected on November 3rd.”
Murkowski has the same sentiments:
“For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election,” Murkowski said in a statement. “Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed.”
Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner is also considered a swing vote, but he came out yesterday supporting a floor vote:
“When a President exercises constitutional authority to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate must decide how to best fulfill its constitutional duty of advice and consent,” Gardner said in a statement.
“I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm,” he added.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Hey, Mitt found an unburned bridge. Of course he still has a gallon of gasoline and a match, so time will tell.
Mitt burned the bridges long ago. He’s burning the boats now.
Don’t underestimate the establishments ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Check his pockets for knives or you’ll be checking your back for them later.
Wow!!!
If this guy knows whats good for him he will support Trumps nominee. The question is, does he know whats good for him???
If he did, he’d be President.
IF the nominee reaches the Senate floor….
In other words, he’s gonna do everything to kill it in committee.
Which is pretty hard to do when you’re not on the committee in question.
I don’t for one minute believe that if he actually does vote, it will be in favor of the nominee.
I expect McConnell to threaten Romney with the prospect of being a “senator without portfolio” if he casts a “no” vote. At this point, I wish McConnell would do the same should he abstain. Same with the other two swamp rats. McConnell should threaten to do this publicly.
I am absolutely certain McConnell sees this nomination as the crowning achievement of his political career. Woe to anyone who tries to deny him. I expect the “gang of three” to soon be singing a different tune.
You have no basis for that supposition. No senator should be saying at this point that they will support whomever the President nominates. That’s not advice and consent, it’s a blank check. Right now the only question before Romney is, if a nominee comes to the floor, should the senate vote on it, and he says yes, it should. Once there is an actual nominee he will have to decide whether he consents to put that person on the court, and at that point his dislike for the President shouldn’t be an issue. If he likes the nominee there’s no reason he would vote against her just because of who nominated her.
Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner is also considered a swing vote, but he came out yesterday supporting a floor vote:
“I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm,” he added.
This sounds like a hedge against, perhaps, Barrett.
It’s what every senator is saying. They’re not giving the President a blank check. Once he names someone they’ll consider that person and decide whether they agree she should be on the court.
Until there is a nomination the only question is whether they’ll even consider the matter. Four years ago all the Republican senators said no, they would refuse to even consider any nomination. This time they’re saying yes, they will consider it.
There is no constitutional duty for the senate to consider a nomination. It’s entirely up to the senate majority, which is entitled to make a partisan decision. Even Gardner isn’t claiming there is such a duty; he spoke only of there being an abstract “duty of advice and consent”, which “the Senate must decide how to best fulfill”. It can decide the best way to fulfill its duty is by not acting, and that’s what it decided four years ago.
True, it’s a variant of what *almost* every Senator is saying. Some of the Leftists have already flung themselves down on the floor and begun to froth at the mouth in preparation for an epic fit when the actual name comes out (and the pre-printed opposition signs are immediately waved, and the pre-written hate editorials are punched into thousands of newspapers)
I would hope the Republicans would develop a tweak to the standard non-commitment response that would roughly go “…all of the nominees on President Trump’s list seem well-qualified and worth nominating, which is a pleasant change of pace from previous presidents who did not make their SC nominee lists public until the actual announcement. Hopefully, this is a procedure that future presidents will continue to maintain.”
(Thwap) backhand to Biden, who promised and failed to produce a SC nominee list of his own.
So any nominee that gets out of committee will be confirmed. The question is whether the Never-Trump Ben Sasse will block the nominee in committee. He can’t block it himself, but with Tom Tillis and Joni Ernst in tight races the question comes if this will hurt their chances.
If Trump nominates a solid constitutionalist, there is no reason Sasse would want to block her. No matter how much he dislikes Trump, he is almost certain to like the nominee, so there’s every reason to expect him to support her, just as he has supported Trump’s other judicial nominees. It’s not as if Trump is going to nominate himself. (In principle he could do that, but the senate would reject him unanimously, and they’d be right to.)
I hope Pres. Trump’s nominee gets a fairer hearing from the Senate than Milhouse usually seems to get from LI.
What a bunch of #NeverMilhousers you guys are!
What’s with politicians not wearing ties anymore? He looks like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Supports a floor vote – but will vote against confirming.
“Romney did not say that he will definitely vote for the nominee.”
Has anyone? It seems premature to promise that before the nominee has been named.
With the possible exception of Sen. Collins, no GOP senator benefits from opposing Trump’s nominee. There will be virtually no leftist votes gained; such voters will still go for Dem candidates. Unless Trump’s nominee is a scary dumpster fire, undecideds aren’t going to be upset by the Senate confirming a nominee. But delaying would only cost GOP votes with no upside.
What’s more, as long as the disposition of this seat is in doubt, the left is maximally motivated. The ONLY way to diminish that energy is to CONFIRM quickly.
And if the public witnesses lefties going wild over a mild mannered mom, all the better. The Kavanaugh freakout hurt the Dems. Can the next one do less?
My sense is collins is going to get re-elected or defeated in Maine irrespective of her vote for a SC justice.
Remember Collins has a sour taste from the Kavanaugh hearings. She was lukewarm to a pro kavanaugh Vote until she read the supplemental FBI report. She made just about a complete reversal of her position to vote for KAvanaugh. Something in the FBI report completely cleared kavanaugh and had some form of info showing Beasly Ford had zero basis for the accusation.
Romney is in and will support the nominee. That’s a certainty. But, it is truly is something to behold, the greasy machinations of this guy’s mind. No backbone or convictions, whatsoever; the epitome of a politician. He leaves himself wiggle room based on the notion of allegedly assessing the nominee’s “qualifications” — as if POTUS would nominate somebody who wasn’t qualified.
The proper statement would be — “After witnessing the Dhimmi-crats’ vicious, unsupported and contrived slanders and character assassination against then-Judge Kavanaugh, as well as their support of goose-stepping rioters and anarachist-goons, I will enthusiastically support whoever this President puts forward as a nominee.”
No, that would not be proper at all. Senators have a duty to seriously consider all nominations, not give the President a blank check. There is every reason to suppose that the President will nominate an excellent candidate, whom every Republican senator can confirm without hesitation. But we won’t know that until he actually does so.
I’ll slightly amend the latter part of my statement:
“…I will enthusiastically support whichever QUALIFIED candidate this President puts forward as a nominee.”
Yes, we can all agree that the Senate should take its advise and consent responsibilities seriously.
But, it’s unrealistic to pretend that the Dhimmi-crats’ utterly vicious and vindictive scorched-earth antics and politics of personal destruction, commenced during Bork’s nomination, escalated during Thomas’s nomination, and, reaching an outrageous nadir (we hope) during Kavanaugh’s nomination, shouldn’t have an impact on the process. It doesn’t mean supporting a “blank-check” approval process, but, expressing some modicum of party loyalty in opposition to this idiocy, before the nominee is selected, is not inappropriate.
Sure, so he can grandstand and vote NO.
I wouldn’t get too excited by Collins or Mittens. All they said is they support the vote. That doesn’t mean they will vote for whoever is nominated. Both of them said the exact same thing, more or less.
“Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm…” – Collins
“If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications…” – Mittens
Read closely and you’ll see both are leaving themselves an out. This is called hedging your bets, friends.
As usual, I’ll wait to judge their actions and not their words. After all, they are politicians.
EDIT:
Gardner not Collins… I’m getting my first cup of coffee now. :/
Everyone on Trump’s three lists (total of 48) are vastly more qualified than Sotomayer. All 48 are far less political than ginsburg from the bench (which the exception of Ted Cruz).
Barrett, & Rushing are both outstanding candidates.
Ted Cruz is well known to be a strong constitutionalist and approaches his job as Senator with that knowledge. He recently stated and was more forthright than most being on PDJT’s list, when he publicly stated he would not accept a nomination for a judicial seat on the SCOTUS. Unlike Ginsburg, he knows that to be a judiciary would limit his ability to call out the left on their understanding of what they don’t know about constitutional government.
I’ll bet Trump will make sure his nominee will get the vote before she is nominated. He will consider every angle…..especially in this particular situation. He cannot afford to leave anything to chance.
Beautiful. Just beautiful. Let us all send our thanks to Christine Blasey Flord and Michael Avennati for ensuring that Justice Amy Coney Barrett has enough votes for confirmation. After all, if it weren’t for their disreputable smears of Kavanaugh, we wouldn’t have increased the republican majority and couldn’t have withstood Murkowski’s and Collins’ defections.
You gotta do right every once in a while to keep the spotlight on when you sell out.
pretty words from the only senator to vote to convict trump!
would not trust this guy to babysit my rattlesnake.
“…I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”
Romney read this as “…I intend to vote based upon how I view their qualifications.”
He’s a sneaky weasel.
He will pretend to consider, and then hold the Republican Party Hostage.
He’ll find some excuse, you know the Mormons don’t much care for the Catholics..