Fact-Checking Sen. Hatch’s Phantom OpEd

WeNeedNine
May 26, 2016 · 3 min read

This morning, the Deseret News published an op-ed from Sen. Orrin Hatch “reacting” to his meeting with President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Chief Judge Merrick Garland, and outlining his “principled” opposition to Garland’s nomination. The only problem? The op-ed was drafted and published hours before the scheduled meeting had even begun.

The episode is only the latest example of Senate Republicans playing politics with the Supreme Court. Instead of doing its job by giving the highly-qualified Chief Judge Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote, the Senate GOP is trying to hold open the Supreme Court seat for Donald Trump, a man they’ve already admitted is an “uninformed,” “dangerous,” and “utterly amoral” “nut-job.”

Sen. Hatch’s op-ed was quickly deleted after being published, but it’s still alive in Google’s cache — and it’s rife with misleading assertions, breathtaking hypocrisy, and some downright whoppers.

Let’s take a moment to fact-check.

To begin with, Sen. Hatch cites his “principled position” of refusing to consider nominees during a presidential election cycle. Putting aside the fact that the Senate has voted on EIGHT Supreme Court nominees during an election year since 1900, Sen. Hatch is violating his own stated principles. In 2001 he signed a letter saying that Supreme Court nominees should get a public hearing and vote, as part of the “important constitutional role of the Senate in connection with Supreme Court nominations.”

Next, Sen. Hatch lists out a series of “precedents” that he claims back up his obstructionist position, including the s0-called “Biden rule” that the Senate should refrain from considering a Supreme Court nomination in a presidential election year. In fact, during Senator Biden’s tenure as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Democratic-controlled Senate confirmed 5 nominees to the Supreme Court, including 3 nominees from Republican presidents.

Sen. Hatch’s argument is also directly contradicted by some of his own past statements, including:

“There are plenty of examples of confirmation of judges in Presidential election years during the fall, some of which occurred during or after the election was held. Stephen Breyer is a perfect illustration. He now sits on the Supreme Court of the United States.” — Sen. Orrin Hatch, July 21, 2004

“There is no reason for stopping the confirmation of judicial nominees in the second half of a year in which there is a Presidential election.” — Sen. Orrin Hatch, April 16, 2008.

“I want to dispel this judicial confirmation myth that there is any kind of rule, let alone a doctrine, that justifies shutting down the confirmation activity.” — Sen. Orrin Hatch, April 16, 2008.

The fact is, the Senate has never taken more than 125 days to vote on a successor from the time of nomination. When Justice Antonin Scalia died, 342 days remained in President Obama’s term. On average, a nominee has been confirmed, rejected or withdrawn within 25 days. Chief Judge Merrick Garland, whom Sen. Hatch called “impressive and “highly qualified” as a D.C. circuit judge nominee, was picked for the Supreme Court more than 70 days ago.

Americans, including Republicans across the country, are sick and tired of these political games. They have one simple message for the Senate: #DoYourJob.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch

Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore

Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade