Obama unveils centrist Garland as Supreme Court pick

Yahoo – AFP, Andrew Beatty, 16 March 2016

Judge Merrick Garland (C) speaks after US President Barack Obama (R) announced 

Garland's nomination to the US Supreme Court, in the Rose Garden at the White 

House on March 16, 2016 (AFP Photo/Nicholas Kamm)

Washington (AFP) - President Barack Obama chose the centrist judge Merrick Garland for a pivotal vacancy on the Supreme Court Wednesday, warning Republican foes their "unprecedented" refusal to consider his nominee threatens the integrity of US institutions.

Obama tapped the 63-year-old judge to replace conservative stalwart Justice Antonin Scalia, who died unexpectedly on the eve of Valentine's Day.

Supreme Court justices are appointed for life and the body's rulings can powerfully influence the treatment of major social issues in America.

Obama said Garland's experience -- from prosecuting the Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh to serving as a clerk for late Justice William Brennan -- "have earned him the respect and admiration of leaders from both sides of the aisle."

Standing at Obama's side during a ceremony in the Rose Garden, Garland became emotional as he described his humble upbringing in Chicago, and vowed to be faithful to the US constitution if confirmed for "the greatest honor" of a Supreme Court seat.

"Trust that justice will be done in our courts without prejudice or partisanship is what, in a large part, distinguishes this country from others," Garland said.

US President Barack Obama, with Vice President Joe Biden (R), announces his 

Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland (front), in the Rose Garden at the White

House in Washington, DC, on March 16, 2016 (AFP Photo/Saul Loeb)

But Republicans fear Garland will tip the even balance of the court toward liberals and have vowed to refuse him even a Senate confirmation hearing.

Senator John McCain said that Obama's "lame-duck" presidency should leave the appointment to next president, who will take office in January next year.

"I believe the American people must have a voice in the direction of the Supreme Court by electing a new president," he said.

Obama -- himself a former constitutional law professor -- made an impassioned case for Republicans to reconsider.

"I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him a fair hearing," he said.

"If you don't, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate's constitutional duty, it will begin a process that is beyond repair."

"Our Supreme Court really is unique. It's supposed to be above politics. It has to be," said Obama, warning that to refuse Garland a hearing "would be unprecedented."

Politics first

The deadlock sets the stage for an election-year showdown with Republicans that will see both sides attempt to increase the electoral costs for their opponents.

The White House is betting that public pressure may force some Republican Senators -- including ones who face reelection in November -- to reconsider their position.

The US Supreme Court building is seen at dawn on March 16, 2016 in Washington,

DC, prior to President Barack Obama's announcement of a nominee to succeed the

late Justice Antonin Scalia (AFP Photo/Alex Wong)

Polls show a sizable majority of Americans -- 63 percent -- believe that the Senate should at least hold hearings on Obama's nominee, against 23 percent who believe otherwise.

The White House is already relentlessly probing for weaknesses in the Republican's so-far unified position.

Officials gleefully noted that some Republicans had already agreed to meet Garland, after party leaders said they would not do so.

Garland's appointment leaves Republicans with a tough task of ignoring someone already confirmed by the Senate once for lower office and who has publicly opposed the judicial activism they claim to resist.

Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, who voted for Garland to the DC circuit court and once suggested he could be appointed to the Supreme Court, defended his current opposition.

"He's a good man," said Hatch. "But he shouldn't be brought up in this toxic environment. I'm tired of the Supreme Court being used as a battering ball back and forth between both sides, that's why I'd put it off until next year, whoever is president it'll be fair."

Questioned about his vote, Hatch responded "that was 19 years ago!"

At the age of 63, Garland would offer Republicans the tantalizing prospect of a candidate who could be expected to serve less time on the bench than some of the younger names floated.

With Hillary Clinton leading in the polls ahead of November's general election, they also face the possibility that their success in opposing him could lead to a more left-leaning nominee being appointed next year.

Clinton described Garland as "a brilliant legal mind" who deserved "a full and fair hearing followed by a vote," but she stopped short of endorsing him.

Scalia, 79, was the intellectual leader of the court's conservative faction.

His death abruptly ended the conservatives' 5-4 advantage on the high court, giving Obama an opportunity to appoint his third justice after Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Related Article:

"You Don’t Know How the Frog Jumps"–  Jan11, 2011 (Kryon Channelling by Lee Carroll) - (Text version)

“…  Last week, I gave you a message about the potentials of 2011. And there were those in this room who attended. I'm going to repeat something I said there, for you need to hear it and it has to do with politics. It would seem intuitive to every single Human Being in the room that in order to accomplish what you do as Americans in Congress, you must have at least two parties. For that is the way it has always been - the red and the blue.

What if I told you that there will come a time when there will be no parties? You might then say, "Well, that's impossible, Kryon, because you're not Human and you don't know how funding works." You might say, "It has to be a party that creates the power to raise money for the ones who cannot, and then the funding is spread around and this is the way we work. If you didn't have parties, you'd have no funding. Nobody could advertise, and no one could get elected."

Oh, really?

Are you aware right now, that you have a president who was elected on the Internet? He figured it out. When everybody can talk to everyone, you have plenty of funding. A few dollars here, a few dollars there. You talk to millions at the same time, they talk to millions at the same time. It's a new paradigm of communication. The young people know all about it, and you can't stop it. Watch for more from this new paradigm.

It is worldwide communication, one person at a time. It doesn't matter how many laws you pass, and it doesn't matter what you decide about who is in charge of it, you can't stop it. It's out of the bag now, and the communities of the young are going to be communicating. This is how the politicians are going to be communicating to you, literally coming into your home in a holographic form perhaps, explaining their position one by one, without a party. Then you will elect them to your Congress without a party and they will sit in the chairs without a division and there will be no such thing as the "other side of the aisle."

And that, Human Being, is called unity and there is a paradigm that you cannot even imagine. And it's in the works. And then you'll have a Congress that works together and gets things done without the current duality.  ….”