Everyone is equal in the eyes of the law.
That’s a pillar of the American experiment, as I’ve argued many times. From the homeless to the President, none are exempt, none get special treatment just because of who they are or the position they occupy. SCOTUS agrees. And if it seems like we don’t always practice it, it remains our ideal.
And that’s an element of my argument why Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA), up for reelection this November, really deserves to be upended and sent home. Here’s the hypocrisy flowing from her mouth:
U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst said Friday that the Senate should hold hearings on any Supreme Court nomination President Donald Trump might make this year, even if he loses November’s election.
“(If) it is a lame-duck session, I would support going ahead with any hearings that we might have,” Ernst, a Republican, said during a taping of the Iowa Press show on Iowa PBS. “And if it comes to an appointment prior to the end of the year, I would be supportive of that.” …
U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican, drew Democrats’ condemnation in 2016 when, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he blocked confirmation hearings for President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland.
That seat became vacant when Justice Antonin Scalia died unexpectedly in February 2016. Obama made his appointment shortly after, but Grassley led the effort to block Garland’s confirmation.
At the time, Grassley cited “the Biden Rule” — a guideline stemming from a speech given by then-Senator Joe Biden in 1992 — in holding up the process. Grassley said the decision to fill the vacancy should be made by whomever was elected president in November 2016 — nine months after the seat became vacant.
Ernst publicly agreed with Grassley’s decision. [Des Moines Register]
This “Biden rule” had never been taken seriously, I’d never heard of it, so I think Grassley was full of shit at the time, although, to his credit, he reiterated his support for that position recently (see above article).
Ernst did not follow suit. And her reasoning was such utter crap that she should be embarrassed to have uttered the words:
It’s very different than what we have seen in the past. We have seen … a president of a different party and a Senate of a different party in previous scenarios. But in this scenario, we have the same party that is the majority in the Senate and the same party that is in the White House.
Previous to this explanation, the most accurate description of the general Republican view that they can nominate, debate, and confirm a SCOTUS Justice when Trump is in office, but they’re somehow bound by a “Biden rule” when Obama was in office was just power-mad hypocrisy.
But it’s more than that, as Ernst makes clear. It’s the revelation that Republicans cannot be bound by the concept that all are equal before the law. That this rule, whether it’s a strong tradition or a bullshit tradition or simply a pack of lies concerning why Judge Merrick would not even be considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee, only applies to Democratic nominees and not Republican nominees, is a clear sneer at an American foundational stone, one of the most conservative elements of American society and the American legal system.
Ernst’s excuse is, in reality, simply putting that arrogant We’re more holier than thou, you jerks! attitude into concrete words.
This is why Ernst should be ejected from her powerful seat this November by outraged Iowa Republican voters who prefer to have true conservatives, by which I mean people of the caliber of the late Senator Lugar (R-IN), and not this Trump-loving denizen of the TrumpSwamp (current TrumpScore: 91%), in office. This is one reason her poll numbers have been far below where they should be in conservative Iowa. More importantly, this is why the entire Republican Party has been falling into national disrepute, and will need to be rebuilt on principles recalling the foundations of America someday.
Not the principles of a financial-quarter based failing business owner.
And perhaps it’s just the prism I stare through, but I am fascinated how the importation of the people and processes of the private sector into the public have been so steadily a disaster.
