Congress, Donald Trump, Issues, Justice, Senate

Senate GOP must be prepared to go nuclear to replace Scalia on the Supreme Court


One issue that helped shape the election was the debate over the next Supreme Court Justice nomination as a fear of a liberal replacement to the late Justice Antonin Scalia brought conservatives to the voting booth in droves. Now President-elect Donald Trump must remain true to his promise and deliver a strict constitutionalist to the Supreme Court, but his new enemy in this battle is not Hillary Clinton, but the Senate.

Trump has already released his list of possible nominees. All 11 potential Supreme Court Justices have strong qualifications for the position and represent the values of conservatism and constitutionality which Trump swore to protect. But Democrats in the Senate are already eager to dismiss any Trump nomination.

Image Credit: CBTBO CC by SA 2.0

Image Credit: CBTBO CC by SA 2.0

A Senate filibuster of Supreme Court nominations is all the Democrats need to require a 60-vote threshold to accept a nominee rather than a simple majority. This is critical, because there are only 52 Republicans holding the majority in the Senate.

However, this judicial filibuster is unique to the Supreme Court, lower courts already have had this opportunity to block voting removed. In 2013 Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid removed the filibuster from lower court nominees and executive office appointments so they could advance with a simple majority rather than the 60-vote supermajority. While this may have seemed like a political ploy at the time to bring justices into lower courts that would assist in Obamacare implementation, the precedent was strong.

Even when Republicans regained control over the Senate, conservative groups across the country banded together to remind Republicans not to revive the judicial filibuster. In a letter to Senate Republicans on Nov. 5, 2014, conservative groups including Americans for Limited Government argued that, “The virtue of the current confirmation process is that it provides a clear, consistent standard for confirmation of nominees from both parties. The Presidents and the Senators who nominate and support those nominees can be held accountable for their decisions, elevating the profile and importance of judicial nominations, giving the public more meaningful insight into the composition of the judicial branch.”

So, despite uproar over breaking the filibuster, reviving it at this stage would be unilateral disarmament by Senate Republicans, preventing any nominees from getting through. But what about the Supreme Court? Won’t Democrats filibuster those nominees, still?

That is why the “nuclear option” of judicial filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee is being brought back up, as Democrats have pledged to block any nominee from Trump. Politico writer Burgess Everett warns that after the failed nomination process for President Obama’s election year option, Merrick Garland, Democrats seem eager to fight back.

For example, when Democratic Senator Jon Tester of Montana was asked if he would accept a nominee to prevent a damaging judicial filibuster his answer was a clear “Hell no.”

Now it is up to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to ensure that Trump’s vision is carried out. The American people voted under the understanding that Senate Republicans would keep a strict constitutionalist in the Supreme Court to replace Justice Scalia, and they gave them a majority to do it.  Eight Democrats and an outdated rule must not this from happening.

Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning in a statement called upon McConnell to act now to ensure a filibuster cannot occur. Manning noted, “It is absurd for Senate Republicans and Trump to have to get the vote of 8 liberal Democrats to put a replacement on the Supreme Court for the late Antonin Scalia. Trump and Republicans won the election largely the Supreme Court upholding the rule of law by replacing Scalia with a strict constitutionalist. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell cannot allow the Democrat minority to dictate who replaces Scalia.”

In other words, if the Democrats try to filibuster Trump’s Supreme Court pick to replace Scalia, or anything subsequent picks, Senate Republicans need to be prepared to go nuclear.

Trump has decided upon his nominees and all represent the qualities the American people voted for, now it is the Senates job to move forward with the nomination process. Senate Democrats cannot be allowed to delay or transform this system, it is integral to the success of our judiciary.

One of Trump’s nominees will be appointed to the Supreme Court, the question is which one, not which Senate Democrat will allow it.

This is a guest post by Natalia Castro contributing editor at Americans for Limited Government.


  • pappy450

    I guess that is the ONE and only thing we can thank Harry Reid for. NOW everyone get going and WRITE your representatives and encourage them to USE the nuclear option and VOTE to move this Country forward and the SCUMOCRATS back to the stone age where they belong.

  • Karll

    Oh, it’s all up to that suck hole mcconnell???

    • WVF

      I cannot understand why this old creep was reinstalled to obfuscate the will of the people.


      at least it not up to your suck hole self. Maybe you can send a letter thanking Harry Kissmyass Reid for the nuclear option (he created it)…LOL LOL

      • Karll

        I’m not a lefty. I was being sarcastic.

  • Robert

    If you think anyone including the Republicans in the Congress is going to let anyone on the Supreme Court that is pushing Religion, then howl at the moon it is not going to happen, the supreme court has already weighed in on laws based on religion, and said it was Unconstitutional, for laws to be based on religion., Separation of Church and State.

    • Liberalbasher1955

      You have now idea what you’re talking about. Separation of church and state only means that the government Fed, State or local can’t establish one religion over others. NOTHING more. The libernazi left as usual, TWISTED the meaning into something that was NEVER intended.

      • Robert

        To start with i an not a Liberal or a conservative.
        The fact is no matter how you look at it if the Government makes laws to support your Religious belief the are establishing a religion becase those would be against other beliefs. It is so cut and dried it is not even an argument the Supreme Court settled that, in I think 1986, with the decision that any law favoring religion was unconstitutional.
        I am well read on the Constitution and federalist papers as well as the letters the founders wrote
        I do know the 2nd was to protect against an over authoritarian government with the militias. In fact the Militia of the era was to protect the states from the Federal Government and each other.
        Any thing else you need to know about the Constitution,let me know.

        • Liberalbasher1955

          “The fact is no matter how you look at it if the Government makes laws to support your Religious belief the are establishing a religion becase those would be against other beliefs”

          No SHI’ITE ! So why did you bring it up ? As this article mentioned NOTHING about Religion ! Nor did anyone who posted say anything about it either.

          As far as “separation of church and state” ? Where is it ! Mr. Well read ? It’s NOT there !

          I see just another DNC DRONE here trying to divert the discussion AWAY from the point in QUESTION ! Appointing Judges who will not make new law and give new protected status to certain, people just by TWISTING words to suit what the LEFT WING COMMUNISTS want.

          Any more Saul Alinski crap you wanna throw ?

          • Robert

            That is what the whole thing about a new Supreme Court Nominee has been about for months According to all articles The vocal Republicans want someone in there that has moral values and will get rid of the rights these LGBTs have. These people have not been given special rights, they have just been given the rights that the Constitution says they are entitled to under the Constitution and the laws of this country.
            I just thought you might like to know Democratic Socialism is not even close to Communism, why do you not go tell a Canadian he is a Communist.
            That is the whole problem with any country each side pushing its own agenda and in most cases the total agenda either party pushes is not what is good for the country.
            I can almost guarantee that it is going to be a good fight to get either one of Trumps picks approved by even his own people in Congress.
            Just remember 24% of those Republicans in Congress are RINOs.
            Which in most cases are level headed persons wanting what is best for everyone.
            HAVE A GOOD DAY



      • Robert


  • ABBAsFernando

    You gotta do what you gotta do.

  • Robert

    Harry Reid and the Democrat party abolished the filibuster when they saw an advantage for themselves to pack the courts with extreme leftists to corrupt the courts. It is at least as legitimate, and surely more so, for the Republicans to make sure the Democrats do not get away with obstructing the expressed will of the people by filibustering Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominations. This is the perfect opportunity to teach the Democrats a lesson they won’t soon forget, one way or the other. If the Republicans really want to end the Democrats gaming the rules in their favor whenever they feel like, do Tit-for-Tat and use their very tactic against them to an even greater degree, and make it abundantly clear to the Dems that they will lose far more than they gain if they try such a stunt again.

    • CDD

      Provided Senate Republicans have the stones to exercise it…


        THEY DO…LOL

  • CDD

    NUKE ‘EM!!!!!

Sign up for our FREE newsletter!

Sign up to receive daily updates, political news, action letters and additional messages from Conservative Republican News

View our Privacy Policy

Join our FREE Newsletter!