Breaking: McConnell Says Obama Won’t Pick Scalia Replacement

Breaking: McConnell Says Obama Won’t Pick Scalia Replacement

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says President Obama will not pick the replacement for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

Scalia died this weekend in Texas of what appears to be natural causes.

According to Politico:

“Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate should not confirm a replacement for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia until after the 2016 election, an aggressive move that precipitates a year of political sniping over the matter during a heated presidential race.

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,” the GOP leader said in a statement.

The statement from the Kentucky senator came barely an hour after the news of the conservative justice’s death was reported by major news outlets, belying his usual cautious nature and daring a bruising political fight with President Barack Obama…”

A former Scalia law clerk notes it ahs been 80 years since a justice was replaced in an election year, and letting Obama pick Scalia’s replacement would not be what Scalia would have wanted.

According to USA Today:

“Ed Whelan, a former Scalia law clerk and leading conservative on legal issues, argued it would be inappropriate for Obama to name Scalia’s replacement in an election year.

“It’s been more than 80 years since a Supreme Court justice was confirmed in an election year to a vacancy that arose that year, and there has never been an election-year confirmation that would so dramatically alter the ideological composition of the court,” Whelan said. “Senate Republicans would be grossly irresponsible to allow President Obama, in the last months of his presidency, to cement a liberal majority that will wreak havoc on the Constitution. Let the people decide in November who will select the next justice.”



  1. Remember when Harry Reid used the nuclear option to shut Republicans out of the confirmation process? Well, the Republicans sure do. It will be interesting to see who the next President nominates.

  2. I can not stand the thoughts of another Obama pick for the Supremes…if McConnell does not hold to this commitment it is over for the GOP and our country.

  3. There is another problem here not being addressed. The Senate is not “In Session” by the Constitution the President can pick a Justice to fill that seat. Being a Leftists “Lame Duck” president of a Republican Majority Congress and McConnell making this statement is like throwing gas on a fire. Don’t put nothing past this Obama to take that threat and put any Liberal into that seat…just out of spite.

    • The Supreme Court Justice has to be confirmed by the Senate, the Senate only–there is absolutely nothing the Obama can do about it if they don’t

      • He can make a recess appointment if the senate refuses to do their job. Since, if McConnell says that there is no vote, then that means the senate must be in recess, which opens up Obama to make a recess appointment.

        • Not true. First, it is their JOB to ADVISE and CONSENT on Supreme Court Justices. It is their JOB to keep the President in check. It is their JOB to uphold the Constitution. It is their JOB to, within the limits of the Constitution, do what the electorate sent them there to do. In 2014, after numerous failures to do their JOB and stop the unconstitutional acts of a lawless President, the ELECTORATE fired many of them. It is now their JOB to prevent this LAME DUCK President from sealing the fate of this country with another lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

          Second, The Supreme Court has already ruled against Obama, 9-0, that his personal definition of “in recess” was invalid and all of his recess appointments were removed. He can’t decide they “the senate must be in recess,” as you stated. If the Senate says they are in session, they are in session.

          We will see if McConnell has the spine to prevent the appointment of another liberal miscreant and stacking the court.

          • It’s their job to advise and consent. If they refuse to do so then Obama has every justification to make a recess appointment. Since how could they be in session and not doing their job at the same time?

          • If you know nothing about Senate rules and procedure, why are you even commenting on this subject? Go take a civics class.

          • What I do know is that the president can force the Senate into session anytime he wants. Did you know that?

          • Wrong. Not even remotely possible. Like I said, take a civics course.

            “On June 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision that President Obama overreached his executive authority in appointing members to the NLRB while the Senate was still formally in session. Justice Stephen Breyer, in the majority opinion, wrote that the Constitution allows for the Congress itself to determine its sessions and recesses, that “the Senate is in session when it says it is”, and that the President does not have the right to unilaterally dictate Congressional sessions and make recess appointments thus.” Wikipedia

            Furthermore, the court ruled that the President can only make recess appointments for vacancies that occurred PRIOR to the a recess, not if the vacancy occurred DURING a recess, which applies to the current situation.

    • Why can’t the Republicans simply remain in session, even if that means foregoing vacation time, and vote not to confirm anyone until the occupier of the White House is gone?

      • IMO this is what McConnell will do: Make a big show of standing firm against any appointment Obama makes and at the very end the person will be approved and McConnell will say; “We tried… there was just nothing we could do.” Same ol’ stuff that has been going on for a long time. Why? Is it $$$$ put in their bank accounts? It seem everyone who goes into Congress with very little money comes out millionaires or billionaires.

        • Nicely said and at thIs point no one except for the naive will believe a word this traitor says. We shall see but in the meantime do contact your senators and representatives to let them know “THEY HAD BETTER STAND FIRM AND LET THE NEXT PRESIDENT ELECT THE NEW JUSTICE! AND FIND OUT WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO SCALIA!

  4. The Democrat -Controlled Senate passed a resolution in 1960 against election year Supreme Court appointments


    The GOP opposed this, of course. Hypocrisy goes two ways. But the majority won.

  5. If McConnell and the rest of the Republican lineup follows trough with this it will go a long way in redeeming themselves.

  6. OK, McConnell, lets see you get some backbone and get ready to fight on this – not just a lot of talk as usual from you.

    Obama’s 2 picks are both incompetents. One had never served as a judge even in a small town court – nothing but academia and government jobs. The other had 30% of her judicial opinions reversed on appeal – that’s a great definition of incompetence! A reversal rate that high should see a judge removed from the bench as incompetent, but she got promoted!

    This country can’t withstand another round of such incompetence !

  7. Finally the dough man, McConnell stands up for something. Well, I guess we shall have to see if this is another pretend fight! So far this man has caved on everything. Think he is finally getting the message from the legal constituents?

  8. Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution:

    [The President] shall nominate, and, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

    I don’t read anything here that says the President can’t nominate someone in the last year of his term. Where are all the “strict constitutionalist” demanding the “rule of law” on this issue? Elephant got your tongue?

    • I have read the Constitution through many times, especially the part of Article II that you just quoted. And do you know what, it has always said and will always say that the SENATE shall ADVISE and CONSENT Judges of the Supreme Court. Therefore, there will never be a Supreme Court Justice appointed without the approval of the Senate. Plain and simple. EVEN if the Senate were to somehow go into recess and Obama were to appoint someone, it would only be valid to the end of the current session. That would occur at the end of the year – THIS YEAR.

      The only thing we need to worry about is whether McConnell has the spine to say no (for the first time in his leadership tenure) to Emperor Obama. If he does, there will not be another Obama appointee to the Supreme Court.

  9. When will there be a Las Vegas and a London “line” on whether the Senate will vote on an Obama nominee? Republicans have a long track record for backing down and eventually surrendering to Mr. Obama.

  10. who trusts ball-less mcdonnell?

    muslim traitor knew he needed to kill a conservative judge to pass his illegal amnesty,
    please someone kill this American hating lawless uppity muslim terrorist traitor

  11. McConnell doesn’t have the backbone to stand up against Obama! He’ll cave just like he has already on important issues. People better start praying, otherwise, America is done for.


  13. Majority Leader McConnell says the American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice. Excuuuse me Mitch, they have!

    Unfortunately for many of the folks posting on this site, you were outvoted twice. Our current president was elected by a clear majority of we American citizens in 2008 and reelected by an even larger majority in 2012. He will be president until January 20.

    Please show me anywhere in the Constitution that presidential powers are limited simply because it is an election year.

    Note to Scalia’s former clerk: Scalia’s wishes in this matter have no bearing on the nomination of his successor. If that were true, then every justice, “Conservative” and “Liberal” would have the right to posthumously pick her/his replacement. In fact, if Scalia is the “Literalist” he always claimed to be, he would have no problem with our current president nominating whoever he chose.

    Again, read the Constitution.

    And, note to “Guest: It doesn’t matter what you can stand or not stand. A current president, no matter which party he represents, has the responsibility of appointing Supreme Court justices.

    FYI: when Cruz was asked, during the debate, if the tables were turned and he were president would he claim the power to nominate a Supreme Court justice and at what date would he cease to be able to nominate, he dodged the question.

    When will people on this board be willing to accept the fact that people who disagree with them politically are not second-class citizens, but enjoy all the rights and privileges, guaranteed by the Constitution, as they do?

    • “has the responsibility of appointing Supreme Court justices.” That is true. But the Senate has the right, reserved to them in the very same Article II of the Constitution, to ADVISE and CONSENT to all nominations the President may make. And yes, as you say, it applies to both liberals and conservatives.

      Where you are wrong is that the Senate is under no time limitation to do so. Also, you seem to forget that the President’s policies and unconstitutional/unlawful actions prompted a massive change in the members of Congress for the purpose to stop him and fight further unilateral action.

      The Senate would be derelict in their duty if they did not use every power afforded them in the Constitution to stop this rogue President. That is why the founders set up separate but equal branches of government.

      The Supreme Court ruled unanimously against President Obama when he tried to bypass the Senate with his prior recess appointments. The Senate has all previous law and precedent on their side. They have no reason to confirm another left wing activist ideologue to the Court. It would assure a swift demise of this great nation.

  14. The GOP controlled Senate need to do whatever it takes to keep Obama from appointing a Justice during any recess!

      • Obama tramples on the US Constitution, and we sure don’t need a Supreme Court Justice who acts and does as he does.

          • Obama goes over the heads of Congress, which is a co-equal branch of government. He attempts to destroy our second amendment rights.(that will never happen )

          • Examples of ” going over the heads of Congress”.
            And an example of trying to destroy your 2nd Amendment rights.

            Not just you or Hannity saying crap cuts it.
            Remember your credibility is at stake here.

          • Are you really that dumb? Has Rachael Maddow, Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews and Al Sharpton messed with your mind so much that you can’t think for yourself? You do understand what co-equal means don’t you?

          • Come on.
            What are you waiting for?
            You can’t provide any examples that back you silly assertions and back them up in a debate?

            What’s the matter?

  15. Well, Mitch has spoken… we can now rest assured that Obama will definitely be picking the next Supreme Court Judge! Mitch is nothing but another Democrap clone!

  16. August 1960, Democrats Passed A RESOLUTION S.RES.334. “Expressing the Sense of the Senate that the President Should NOT Make Recess Appointment To The Supreme Court, except to Prevent or End a Breakdown in the Administration of The Courts Business.” End of Story…They Wrote this, They MUST abide By It!

  17. August 1960 Democrats Passed a RESOLUTION S.RES.334 Expressing the sense that the PRESIDENT SHOULD NOT Make Recess Appointments To The Supreme Court, Except to Prevent or End a Breakdown in the Administration of The Courts Business.

  18. Two things happened in 2009:
    1) When Mitch McConnell was asked what his chief legislative goal for the next few years was, he replied, “Making Obama a one term president.”
    2) A recording of a meeting of House Republicans reveals the statement by Republican House leadership: “All we have to do is say no to everything Obama proposes. After all, he’s the one who promised to be bipartisan.”
    These two quotes speak volumes about congressional Republicans’ approach to governing. They are more concerned about playing politics than doing what’s good for the country and they don’t, or refuse to, understand that politics is the art of compromise.
    How is any president supposed to work with people who take this approach? The only way our current president could have gotten along with these people would be to have turned his back on the voters who elected him and go along with everything Republicans wanted in spite of the promises he made during the campaign to his supporters.

    What many people fail to understand is, for our political system to work, no one gets everything they want. You may not like the way the elections turned out, but that’s just too bad. Live with it.

    • You don’t like the fact that our current president was elected to two terms? Too bad. Grow up. Your candidates lost both elections. Maybe you will pick a better candidate this time, one who can beat Hillary.

Leave a Reply