Click here to subscribe today or Login.
WILKES-BARRE — U.S. Rep. Matt Cartwright Friday strongly responded to U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey’s “perfunctory meeting” with Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court.
Cartwright, D-Moosic, said Toomey emerged from the sit-down “only to double down on his unpopular, unconstitutional position that Garland is undeserving of a hearing, let alone a vote, despite having more federal judicial experience than any other Supreme Court nominee in history.”
Toomey offered a detailed explanation of his position regarding Obama’s nomination of Garland. Earlier this week, Toomey met with Garland, 63, for over an hour and found the nominee to be “a pleasant man with impressive legal training and experience.”
However, Toomey, R-Zionsville, said two factors weigh heavily against Garland’s confirmation.
• First, Toomey said the balance of the Supreme Court is at stake.
“We have an election right around the corner,” he said. “With lifetime tenure, the next justice will determine the court’s balance for a generation. In that light, I believe it is sensible to allow the American people to participate in the choice of Justice Scalia’s successor less than seven months from now.”
• Second, Toomey said areas of Garland’s record give him pause.
“Judge Garland’s record raises serious doubts that he would serve as an adequate, independent legal check on the EPA and other federal agencies,” he said. “Garland has ruled on dozens of cases involving challenges to new EPA regulations, and has sided with the agency over 90 percent of the time. One of the handful of times Garland ruled against the EPA, he ruled that it was not regulating enough.”
Toomey said he tried to discuss these issues with Garland and said Garland was often unresponsive — unwilling to discuss one of his own decisions, and refusing to opine on historic Supreme Court precedents.
“In short, he did nothing to alleviate my concerns,” Toomey said. “The stakes are too high for error, not only with the balance of the Supreme Court, but with the futures of Pennsylvania workers, farmers and businesses.”
Cartwright said the Supreme Court is “dysfunctional right now,” having had several 4-4 votes recently.
“Effectively, we have no Supreme Court,” Cartwright said. “This is a shutdown in the judicial branch of the federal government.”
Cartwright, D-Moosic, said federal circuit courts — some 13 in all — can render their own different interpretations of the Constitution with no final arbiter.
“We have to end this temper tantrum that Senate Republicans are engaging in right now,” Cartwright said. “I, for one, am disappointed that Sen. Toomey is among the senate Republicans behaving in this immature nature.”
In March, U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, D-Scranton, called on Senate Republicans to “end the obstruction” and give Supreme Court nominees a fair hearing and a timely vote.
Casey has one message for his Republican colleagues in the U.S. Senate.
“Do your job,” he said. “It’s as simple as that.”
Casey said the U.S. Constitution provides a simple and clear path to nominate a Supreme Court candidate.
Toomey said during his meeting with Garland, the nominee did not allay his concerns.
“In an era in which terrorists are actively using every weapon at their disposal to kill innocent Americans, we cannot afford to appoint a Supreme Court justice who fails to understand these dangers,” Toomey said.
Toomey said while Garland is highly credentialed, areas of his legal thinking deeply concern him.
“Particularly, his excessive deference to over-reaching agency regulations and his approach to the war on terror,” Toomey said. “These concerns, in addition to my preference for giving the American people a voice in November about the long-term balance of the Court, lead me to oppose his nomination at this time.”
