As the Supreme Court nomination fight heats up, keep an eye out for some of the Senate Republicans’ notable accomplices—backed by conservative billionaire funders—who are colluding with Republicans in this unprecedented obstruction.
Carrie Severino, Policy Director & Chief Counsel, Judicial Crisis Network
Phil Kerpen, head of pro-small government group, American Commitment
Ed Whalen, President, Ethics & Public Policy Center
Ed Meese III, Emeritus Fellow, Heritage Foundation & former Reagan US Attorney General
Carrie Severino, Policy Director & Chief Counsel, Judicial Crisis Network
Leading the opposition to fill the vacancy is Carrie Severino from the Judicial Crisis Network, a Koch-backed organization, that launched a $1.5 million “thank ‘n’ spank” ad campaign, supporting Republicans and condemning Democrats only days after Justice Scalia’s death.
Leading the opposition to fill the vacancy is Carrie Severino from the Judicial Crisis Network, a Koch-backed organization, that launched a $1.5 million “thank ‘n’ spank” ad campaign, supporting Republicans and condemning Democrats only days after Justice Scalia’s death.
Originally, JCN was the Judicial Confirmation Network and it advocated for ending “the obstruction of judicial nominees.” During the Bush administration, JCN called on (Democratic) Senators to “recognize the right of every nominee sent to the full Senate to receive a full and fair up-or-down vote.” But JCN changed its name (to Judicial Crisis Network) and mission when President Obama was sworn in. The founders of JCN are old regulars at Koch summits, and JCN receives $4 million in funding from the Koch-connected Wellspring Committee.
According to Roll Call, Severino and JCN are escalating their actions now that Pres. Obama has nominated Judge Merrick Garland:
“We know the president’s aggressively trying to frame Garland as if he were a total moderate,” said Severino, chief counsel and policy director for the conservative Judicial Crisis Network. “That couldn’t be farther from the truth.”
“We know the president’s aggressively trying to frame Garland as if he were a total moderate,” said Severino, chief counsel and policy director for the conservative Judicial Crisis Network. “That couldn’t be farther from the truth.”
Severino’s group is launching a $2 million advertising campaign that will include spots thanking GOP senators, such as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, and Judiciary Chairman Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, who is up for re-election. The pair controls the nomination process and has said the next president should make the nomination.
The group also is hiring new employees, contracting out for help and is working in tandem with other issue groups such as the National Rifle Association and organizations that oppose abortion, Severino said.
“We’re welcoming anyone else who wants to help in this fight,” she said.
Her aggressive stance against Judge Garland is a 180 from what she said on-the-record when she praised him in 2010 in a Washington Post article:
“Carrie Severino of the conservative Judicial Crisis Network said Garland may be far more liberal than his rulings indicate because he has yet publicly staked out his position on issues such as abortion.“‘But of those the president could nominate, we could do a lot worse than Merrick Garland,’ Severino said. ‘He’s the best scenario we could hope for to bring the tension and the politics in the city down a notch for the summer.‘”
Phil Kerpen, head of pro-small government group, American Commitment
The former vice president of Americans for Prosperity, Phil Kerpen was an early subscriber to Sens. McConnell and Grassley’s #NoHearingsNoVote obstruction.
The former vice president of Americans for Prosperity, Phil Kerpen was an early subscriber to Sens. McConnell and Grassley’s #NoHearingsNoVote obstruction.
Kerpen wrote that the only way conservatives can “win” regarding a Supreme Court appointee is “to take their case directly to the American people in this year’s election.” On his website blog, he wrote that “President Obama has shown nothing but contempt for the legislative branch. Now when the president who dismissively said ‘I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone. And that’s all I need’ picks up that phone and calls the Senate for action on a Supreme Court nomination, the Senate should say no. No hearings, no votes. The stakes are too high and the differences are too stark – and the only way conservatives can win is to take their case directly to the American people in this year’s election.”
Sample tweets:
“Nobody cares who Obama nominates. There will be #NoHearingsNoVotes. Not about the person.” [Phil Kerpen – Twitter, 3/16/16]
“Nobody cares who Obama nominates. There will be #NoHearingsNoVotes. Not about the person.” [Phil Kerpen – Twitter, 3/16/16]
“Do your job Senate! Your job is to STOP Obama’s liberal judges.” [Phil Kerpen – Twitter, 3/16/16]
Ed Whalen, President, Ethics & Public Policy Center
On the day of Justice Scalia’s death, Ed Whalen penned a National Review op-ed saying, “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.”
On the day of Justice Scalia’s death, Ed Whalen penned a National Review op-ed saying, “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.”
The irony is that in 2007, Whelan predicted that any politician would suffer “severe political costs” for any “departure” from the “long-established precedent” of giving SCOTUS nominees an up-or-down vote.
Ed Meese III, Emeritus Fellow, Heritage Foundation & former Reagan US Attorney General
The Republicans are pulling anyone they can out of the woodwork, including Heritage Foundation’s Ed Meese, who this week in a Fox News op-ed gave a big thumbs up to the Senate Republicans’ obstruction.
“Let the people decide the next justice with their votes for the next president — whoever it is. Don’t deny them that right this close to what is sure to be an historic election, that will not only determine where the American people want their country to go but the direction they want their court to take.”
The Republicans are pulling anyone they can out of the woodwork, including Heritage Foundation’s Ed Meese, who this week in a Fox News op-ed gave a big thumbs up to the Senate Republicans’ obstruction.
“Let the people decide the next justice with their votes for the next president — whoever it is. Don’t deny them that right this close to what is sure to be an historic election, that will not only determine where the American people want their country to go but the direction they want their court to take.”
However, Meese has forgotten what he said in 2004 when he blasted Senate Democrats for pulling “shenanigans” with judicial nominees:
“Certain senators have made every effort to deprive President Bush of his power to appoint judges with the advice and consent of the Senate….Plainly, these lawmakers are not interested in an even-handed application of the rules. They are merely manipulating the verbiage of principle to partisan advantage. Such unprecedented shenanigans politicize the judiciary — contrary to the very purpose of life appointments, which is to insulate federal judges from politics. Americans shouldn’t tolerate this hypocrisy.”
“Certain senators have made every effort to deprive President Bush of his power to appoint judges with the advice and consent of the Senate….Plainly, these lawmakers are not interested in an even-handed application of the rules. They are merely manipulating the verbiage of principle to partisan advantage. Such unprecedented shenanigans politicize the judiciary — contrary to the very purpose of life appointments, which is to insulate federal judges from politics. Americans shouldn’t tolerate this hypocrisy.”
And in 1986, The New York Times reported Meese calling the “[Senate Judiciary] committee’s failure to approve the nomination ‘an appalling surrender’ to the politics of ideology.”
“The Attorney General said the campaign waged against the nominee by a number of liberal groups was ‘based entirely on their political and philosophical differences with Reagan Administration policies and initiatives,’ and added, ‘Political or ideological litmus tests should have no place in the confirmation process.’”
“The Attorney General said the campaign waged against the nominee by a number of liberal groups was ‘based entirely on their political and philosophical differences with Reagan Administration policies and initiatives,’ and added, ‘Political or ideological litmus tests should have no place in the confirmation process.’”
For more information about how conservative groups and Senate Republicans are refusing to do their job, go to American Bridge’s report: “Strict Obstructionists: The GOP’s Politicization of Their Constitutional Duty.”