The arguments rage over whether or not the Senate will take up the nomination of Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court. The Democrat Party, supported by the the Main Stream Media (i.e. the left-wing media), are screaming that it is the constitutional responsibility of the Senate to hold hearings and have an “up-or-down” vote on the nominee. This Senate duty arises out the Constitutional mandate to “advise and consent.” Is that the meaning of “advise and consent?”
One of our most prestigious conservative thinkers “advises” us.
Thomas Sowell instructs us that “the ‘advice and consent’ provision of the Constitution is a restriction on the President’s power, not an imposition of a duty on the Senate. It says nothing about the Senate’s having a duty to hold hearings, or vote, on any Presidential nominee, whether for the Supreme Court or for any other federal institution. The power to consent is the power to refuse to consent, and for many years no hearings were held, whether the Senate consented or did not consent.”
And, “Amen,” Brother Sowell.