- Aug 21, 2020
- Reaction score
No, they rejected Garland so thoroughly that they didn't need a public spectacle to embarrass him. Sure they could have had hearings and spent weeks going over every aspect of his life and judicial history with a pre-determined outcome. But they didn't. Obama was free to withdraw the nomination and nominate someone else, but he chose not to do so.The Senate did not reject GarlandSure, I'll explain it to Garland. The President nominated him, which is his Constitutional authority. The Senate rejected him, which is their Constitutional authority.
Turns out it was pretty simple, huh?
They rejected a sitting President being able to fill a SCOTUS vacancy in an election year