May 1st, 2009
04:12 PM ET
3 years ago

McConnell: Nominee must put politics aside

(CNN) - Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called on President Obama Friday to choose a Supreme Court nominee who is "able to fulfill the judicial oath of applying the law without prejudice, and not decide cases based on their feelings or personal politics."

Full statement:

“I thank Justice Souter for his service and wish him well in his future endeavors once he leaves the Supreme Court.“I trust the President will choose a nominee for the upcoming vacancy based on their experience and even-handed reading of the law, and not their partisan leanings or ability to pass litmus tests. A Supreme Court nominee needs to be able to fulfill the judicial oath of applying the law without prejudice, and not decide cases based on their feelings or personal politics.

“Once there is a nominee, I will work to ensure that their record is thoroughly reviewed and that there is a full and fair debate.”


Filed under: David Souter
soundoff (156 Responses)
  1. G Grady

    I don't recall the Republic president adhering to this type of test. Of course nothing that the Republicans demand of the Democrats are demanded of themselves.

    May 1, 2009 04:29 pm at 4:29 pm |
  2. Matt

    At least no one believes this clown.

    May 1, 2009 04:31 pm at 4:31 pm |
  3. Laverne

    Translation: I will do everything humanly possible to hold up anyone you nominate. I will go through their kindergarten records with a fine tooth comb, I want to know if they like cream in their coffee and if he/she say grace before eating. If I don't personally like who you nominate, I will have a hissy fit!

    May 1, 2009 04:32 pm at 4:32 pm |
  4. A little sad

    Andi May 1st, 2009 4:24 pm ET

    oh, that's a good one, Mitchy. Please tell us what the new Justice 'must' do. That's right up there with 'demanding' an apology. It doesn't matter who he picks – Obama could bring you Jesus Christ, himself as a nominee and you'd still vote 'no'. How dare you tell anyone to put politics aside. Remember, the American voters put the GOP aside, and you still can't seem to accept that, so I personally don't care what you think.

    I do hope it's a Black Woman, tho. That'll REALLY freak them out!

    Isn't Michelle Obama a lawyer? Now THAT would really freak them out.

    May 1, 2009 04:33 pm at 4:33 pm |
  5. Bob

    I voted for Obama for one reason: To pick good justices that aren't crazies like Scalia and Roberts. How dare the GOP demand any say in picking the next justice; one of the reasons they lost is the nutty talk of the Mitch McConnells out there.

    May 1, 2009 04:34 pm at 4:34 pm |
  6. A Kentuckian

    This coming from Mr. Make-It-Political himself - Mitch McConnell?

    This is a standup comic routine of some sort, right?

    May 1, 2009 04:34 pm at 4:34 pm |
  7. Throw out all incumbents

    He'll probably nominate Michelle.

    May 1, 2009 04:35 pm at 4:35 pm |
  8. Same Old White House

    the GOP needs to understand the nominee will not be allowed to have their own opinions. The party of only one opinion will not allow it.

    May 1, 2009 04:35 pm at 4:35 pm |
  9. Andrew, Chicago

    Oh, like when Roberts and Alito were picked?

    May 1, 2009 04:35 pm at 4:35 pm |
  10. TBD

    McConnell, is a ding bat, he should think twice before opening his mouth. Look at Geroge Walker Bush, his pick was in favor of the Republican party.

    May 1, 2009 04:35 pm at 4:35 pm |
  11. Jeffrey in Marietta, GA

    Ha. Ha ha ha. HA HA HA! Boy, he must be hating being in the minority.

    May 1, 2009 04:37 pm at 4:37 pm |
  12. Rich in Seattle

    Did a Republican seriously just say "fulfill the judicial oath of applying the law without prejudice"? I have Three names for them, Alito, Scalia and Thomas. I tell you what, let Obama put up someone who is as much to the left of politics as those three people are to the right. If those three current justices are fair and without political prejudice, then you shouldn't have any problem using them as how Obama should pick his first justice. How come I have a feeling that would make the Republicans uncomfortable?

    May 1, 2009 04:38 pm at 4:38 pm |
  13. The Broker.

    The Book is maily about: How to program people.

    May 1, 2009 04:38 pm at 4:38 pm |
  14. scott

    McConell needs to retire, so a true Republican can be picked to represent the American people. No more Bush followers. We need new Repulican leadership. McConnell go retire with Souter. We dont care what you think.

    May 1, 2009 04:39 pm at 4:39 pm |
  15. Saul- Virginia

    I am all for balance of the supreme court, which is why i want the president to pick someone that will counter Alito and roberts that Bush Picked to satisfy the right.

    May 1, 2009 04:39 pm at 4:39 pm |
  16. Preston

    Do they not teach basic English in Kentucky?

    "I trust the President will choose a nominee for the upcoming vacancy based on their experience ... Once there is a nominee, I will work to ensure that their record is thoroughly reviewed..."

    I think I learned subject-verb agreement in grammar school. It is instructive to note that the Senate Republican Minority Leader, who somehow managed to get through college and law school (both in Kentucky), apparently still is incapable of speaking English. This, of course, was a planned – not spontaneous – statement.

    Considering the source, why is this not surprising?

    May 1, 2009 04:40 pm at 4:40 pm |
  17. old timer

    One of the biggest questions will be how much does the new appointee owe in back taxes.
    Can the new appointee understand how to use a computer so that he can run TurboTax
    Will the new appointee favor closing all of our borders regardless of any flu epidemic or just plain illegals sneaking across

    May 1, 2009 04:40 pm at 4:40 pm |
  18. Simmy

    You didn't say that when the other justices were appointed, mainly Roberts....Let President Obama make his own choice....

    May 1, 2009 04:40 pm at 4:40 pm |
  19. NFL

    If the GOP had been that high minded when replacing Justices I would agree, but NO WAY NO HOW can we let this court be taken over by one sided thinking!

    I want a person who will be able to read the Constitution, but also assess the framers' intent in the context of current society's developments (ie there is no longer slavery, women as property, etc. we need to be able to have law and justice accordingly!).

    May 1, 2009 04:41 pm at 4:41 pm |
  20. ANGIE IN PA

    It is not up to the Republicans to tell the President who to Pick He is the President instead of telling him who to Pick WORK WITH HIM MORE!

    May 1, 2009 04:41 pm at 4:41 pm |
  21. sperry

    In other words, "Give us the person we tell you to or we'll stonewall the process until you do."

    These people are so transparent.

    May 1, 2009 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  22. NFL

    I had hoped that Hillary would have been "saved" to be the nominee, knowing that would have "gotten to the GOP" like fingernails on a chalkboard (we need another elected woman like Sandra Day O'Connor, but left of center).

    I only hope that the nominee is about 45-50 years old (in the Roberts and Alito age-bracket so they have a nice LONG time to balance one another).

    May 1, 2009 04:44 pm at 4:44 pm |
  23. lucy

    We'll believe that when it happens. Somehow these guys think anyone who doesn't agree with them – which is most of us – are "playing politics" but never admit that they are.

    May 1, 2009 04:44 pm at 4:44 pm |
  24. Andrew Calvin

    They should take their own advice. They say things like this all the time, and it has always angered me. They are hypocrites. Everything they do regularly is wrong for anyone to do but them. The GOP seems to just sit around trying to think up ways to destroy the other side rather than actually doing their jobs.

    May 1, 2009 04:44 pm at 4:44 pm |
  25. Michael

    This is both ludicrous and hypocritical. The practice of "court stacking" began with Ronald Reagan and has been a favorite tool of Republican administrations ever since. This applies not only to the Supreme Court but to the whole of the federal judiciary. George W. Bush would not even consider an appointment to the bench unless the person passed the litmus test of being opposed to abortion rights; and, as CNN reported just this afternoon, several conservative legal groups are already calling for litmus tests. They want someone opposed to abortion and opposed to gay marriage. The fact is that the court is now very much stacked with conservative ideologues: for sure Thomas, Scalia, and Alito, and probably Roberts. It's time the conservatives faced the fact of the last election results and backed off.

    May 1, 2009 04:45 pm at 4:45 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7