Another very interesting editorial by The Baltimore Sun, but where to begin (“Save the Senate: Vote against Brett Kavanaugh,” Sept. 6)? First of all, kudos to The Sun for identifying a problem with the behavior of the Senate as referenced to the hearings for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. But again, here we have a situation where The Sun got it half right! The Senate was charged under its role to provide “advice and consent” to the president as to the judicial temperament of his nominee. The Sun is correct — the Senate failed to do that. Where The Sun has failed to get it totally correct is in considering the actions of the Democratic senators, not only during the hearings but even before.
Many Democrats announced that they would oppose President Donald Trump’s nominee, even before he had announced who that would be! “Predisposed” is a word that comes to mind. The Democrats would not give a favorable vote no matter how many documents they were given and they said that they would oppose the nominee no matter what. So, what then would be the purpose of them demanding thousands, if not millions of pages of “new” documents when they had already decided to oppose the nominee? This demand for more information was a not-so-clever use of political posturing to achieve just one thing — delaying the appointment of another conservative justice until they regained the majority that would allow them to disqualify him. A simple but potentially effective strategy had they been able to delay the process until after the mid-term elections. You want to talk about transparency? Anyone could see right through their strategy.
In closing, one must consider the sole function of the Supreme Court, that being to rule on issues of constitutionality. Quite a bit was made during the recent circus that masqueraded as a hearing about the need for a Supreme Court justice to know, understand, and to fairly and equitably apply the U.S. Constitution. Once again, fair enough! However, going back in the history of recent appointments to the Supreme Court, we now have two demonstrably anti-Constitution justices on that court. I do not recall any editorials from The Sun when those processes broke down and those two judges were confirmed. Apparently, The Sun’s editorial board put its righteous indignation away for a while back then! At any rate, congratulations, Sun. In this case, at least you got it half right.
Robert L. DiStefano, Abingdon
Become a subscriber today to support editorial writing like this. Start getting full access to our signature journalism for just 99 cents for the first four weeks.