“As a matter of constitutional law, the Senate is fully within its powers to let the Supreme Court die out, literally,” wrote the Cato Institute’s Ilya Shapiro in a column Wednesday titled “The Senate Should Refuse To Confirm All Of Hillary Clinton’s Judicial Nominees” on The Federalist.
This article explains that Shapiro is well-versed in constitutional issues, and his argument has a legal, if contorted, basis. Nothing in the Constitution explicitly stands in the way of senators who would be willing to destroy the nation’s highest court ― if not an entire branch of the federal government ― to stop Clinton from selecting judges who share her views.
Both Senators John McCain (http://huff.to/2faKvWY) and Ted Cruz (http://on.msnbc.com/2eTQ48u) have announced that they both intend to indefinitely continue blocking any judge proposed by President Obama or Hillary Clinton if elected.
Considering the Republican Party’s dogged refusal to negotiate or compromise on most issues over the last eight years and their nearly unwavering dedication to obstruction even when doing so is detrimental to their own constituents, it really isn’t a difficult leap to think that they’d actually be willing to kill off the one branch of our three branches of government that has the authority to declare the laws they are attempting to create (such as the religious right to discriminate and voter obstruction laws) are actually unconstitutional.
So the questions I have for you are these:
If the Supreme Court is allowed to die by attrition, what is the impact on our national political structure with the loss of the three way check and balance system between the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches
Is it a transition our society and/or economy could survive?
Does the willingness of one party to hold hostage and threaten to destroy a fundamental core piece of our governmental structure influence the way you had intended to vote on either the Presidential or down ballot options?