As RedState previously reported, a number of prominent Senate Republicans including some of the more moderate ones like Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) indicated in no uncertain terms that they would not support any proposal on the Democratic side to put a temporary replacement on the Senate Judiciary Committee while Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) continues her longer-than-expected recovery from the shingles virus.
In an update to this story, we’re happy to let readers know that the Senate GOP, led – surprisingly enough – by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), indeed followed through with their promise to block Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who put forth a resolution earlier calling on his Senate colleagues to allow another Senator – Maryland’s Ben Cardin – to temporarily sit in Feinstein’s place on the committee:
Senate Republicans on Tuesday evening blocked a request from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to temporarily replace Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., on the Judiciary Committee so that committee has the numbers to advance President Biden’s judicial nominees.
Schumer, D-N.Y., introduced the resolution and asked that it be approved by unanimous consent – a method that requires every senator to agree. Unanimous consent allows the Senate to quickly approve non-controversial measures without hours and days of necessary debate in the upper chamber.
But Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., stood to oppose the move and [rejected] Schumer’s request. That objection means Democrats will need to find 60 votes to approve his request, which will require 10 Republicans to cross the aisle.
Newsflash: They don’t have those votes. At least six GOP members of the Senate Judiciary Committee including Graham (who is the ranking member) have already gone on record as saying they won’t support it, and as noted above, Murkowski and Collins are also no’s.
Needless to say, this is causing a lot of heartbreak on the Democratic side, not only stalling their efforts at ramming through some of Biden’s most radical judicial picks but also their push to investigate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:
New Feinstein wrinkle.
Democratic aide says the Judiciary Committee can’t issue a subpoena as part of a Clarence Thomas inquiry; that would require a majority on the panel and Democrats don’t have it without her.
“So that option is out of the question.”https://t.co/IA1NNKVXS8
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) April 18, 2023
Ha! You love to see it, you truly do.
In remarks that were classic “Cocaine Mitch,” Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) got to the heart of the matter in his floor speech on what Democrats were really trying to do, while also suggesting what they could do instead if they wanted to get some nominees out of the committee and onto the floor for a vote:
“In the meantime, our colleague’s temporary absence has not ground the Judiciary Committee to a halt.
“So far this Congress, the Committee has reported out 40 judicial nominees, more than half of them on bipartisan votes.
READ RELATED: Exchanging the Truth For a Lie
“Let me say that again: More than two dozen judicial nominees have been reported out this Congress on bipartisan votes.
[…]
“People who are mainstream and qualified have a path forward. And yet — some of the same far-left voices who’ve attacked Senator Feinstein in the past are now suggesting that the Senate move her off the Judiciary Committee indefinitely.
“The stated reason, the supposed emergency, is that Senate Democrats are unable to push through the small fraction of their nominees who are so extreme and unqualified that they cannot win a single Republican vote in Committee.
“Let me say that again. The far left wants the full Senate to move a Senator off a committee so they can ram through a small sliver of their nominees who are especially extreme or unqualified.
“There are four main nominees that our Democratic colleagues are currently unable to move. One of them threatened an underage abuse victim while representing her prep school. One of them didn’t know what Article II of the Constitution says…
“One of them didn’t know what a Brady motion is. And the fourth one argued that the sex offender registry does not help keep children safe.
“These four nominees are not on track to get bipartisan support.
“It’s purely the Democrats’ political choice to hold the relatively more reasonable nominees hostage so the unqualified ones can move in a pack.
In other words, nominate candidates who are less woke in the handful of instances where there are nominations that are stalled, and then we’ll talk.
As I said before, if the shoe was on the other foot here, the Democrats would take the same position Republicans have and not budge on it, so I’m happy to see a rare moment of unity among all factions of the Senate GOP in not joining in on the Democrats’ reindeer games.
Your move, Senator Chuckles.
Related: Pelosi ‘Goes There’ on the Fetterman Angle as ‘Feinstein Resign’ Drama Reaches Fever Pitch
Trending on RedState Video
Source:
