A conservative and a progressive can be friends. In fact, they can be best friends. Since we were 5 years old, I’ve had a friend that I always knew was on the opposite side of the political spectrum.
One of us does not agree with gay marriage, the other is a staunch advocate for equal marriage protections. We both have gay friends. One of us believes the financial crisis was brought on by irresponsibility of lenders and creditors and the other charges it was the irresponsibility of consumers borrowing more than they can afford. We still have a running score card from our on-going Monopoly tournament — it’s currently in its 20th year.
One of us was raised an Evangelical Christian and caucused for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, the other was raised Presbyterian, turned-humanist and caucused for President Barack Obama. One preforms in a Christmas musical every year, while the other is always in the audience waiting for his friend’s solo.
Friendships can transcend societal labels. Look at two of this country’s highest adjudicators — Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the late Antonin Scalia. During the political plays this week for the United State Supreme Court’s ideological upper ground, following Scalia’s unexpected death, the justices’ unlikely friendship was a shinning star in a dark sky of demagoguery. It was revealed that the progressive Ginsburg and constitutional originalist Scalia were not just friendly, but off the bench it appears they were inseparable. Their families vacationed and ate holiday dinners together. They disagreed fiercely on each others’ dissenting and majority opinions, but respected the others’ intelligence. Americans should learn from these leaders.
Within minutes of the news of Scalia’s passing, the battle lines were drawn. The Senate Republican majority said it would be wrong for a lame-duck president to nominate a replacement in an election year, and refused to hold a hearing on any candidate sent to Capitol Hill — citing past precedent. President Obama said it was his constitutional duty to appoint and would send an “undeniably” nominee to the Senate, expected a fair hearing.
With cases holding the fate of EPA’s carbon emission regulations, the world climate summit agreement, decisions on limiting abortion access and more of the president’s legacy likely to be brought before the court soon, an 4-4 split decision would create a black hole of indecision.
Last week, C-SPAN footage surfaced of Iowa's senior U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley praising the judicial record and philosophy of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was nominated in 1987 but confirmed in February 1988 — an election year. You can see a much younger Grassley speaking here: cs.pn/1U7URTc. In the opening sentence of his statement, Grassley thanked then-Senator and Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Joe Biden for expediting the hearing so quickly after the committee's winter recess.
Today, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Grassley is claiming there is no precedent for nominating and confirming a Supreme Court Justice during an election year. Although it’s true Justice Kennedy was nominated a few months earlier in Nov. 1987, he was confirmed only 11 months before President Ronald Reagan would leave office. Kennedy is a true moderate. He could be called the swing vote, siding with both ideological wings of the court on multiple decision.
Grassley has since backtracked a bit, and has indicated he’s not ruled out hearings on an Obama nominee. At the time of Kennedy’s confirmation, there was no way of knowing if a Democrat or Republican president would succeed Reagan in the White House. But Grassley apparently believed it was Reagan and the Senate’s constitutional duties to fill the bench vacancy. Kennedy was confirmed 97-0. Let’s hope Grassley continues to be the pragmatic legislator that many Iowa voters — Republican and Democrat — have believed him to be for decades.
We need to stop playing politics with a Supreme Court that is supposed to be the least political branch in our government. It’s time to let a Democratic president nominate a justice that will be approved by a Republican-controlled Senate. We cannot get more bipartisan than that.
Our leaders need to give the memory of Justice Scalia and his surviving colleagues some respect and fill one of the most important government vacancies of our time.
Contact Mike Mendenhall
at mmendenhall@newtondailynews.com