LETTER: Supreme Court
To the editor:
Democrats did not want the president to nominate a new Supreme Court Justice. Who do you think Democrats would blame if the Nov. 3 presidential election is contested and eventually goes to a Supreme Court of eight members and the result is a split decision? The court would not be able to issue any nationwide ruling on an issue where justices split four to four.
Our U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2 says: “(The President) shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the Supreme Court.” It doesn’t say he should, could, or might, but that he “shall.” “Shall” has legal meaning. Moreover, Article VI says our Constitution is the “supreme Law of the Land.”
Reasons President Trump nominated a new justice now:
1. It is his duty. The president has complete power to nominate while the Senate possesses complete power to reject or confirm the nominee.
2. The Center for Voter Information is mailing ballot applications that appear to be from a government source. Investigative reporter Morgan Phillips told the Washington Examiner that the CVI has sent over 800,000 unrequested mail-in ballot applications to people in Virginia but around 500,000 had blanks already filled-in, incorrectly.
3. For months “has-been Hillary” advised Democrats not to concede the election results under any circumstance. Many predict that this election might be contested. So this is not the year to have a stalemate on our highest court or to horse around about following our constitution.