We are pleased Maine’s two U.S. senators have met with Judge Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, and asked him about his judicial philosophy, his views on regulatory issues and on the separation of powers. We are also pleased both have called for full hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Garland’s suitability to serve on our nation’s highest court.

In meeting with Garland, Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King have not only exhibited basic manners but also performed the duties of the office they sought and swore an oath to carry out. In calling for hearings on his nominations, they have recognized Americans benefit when all three branches of government function well. We wish their actions weren’t noteworthy, and we especially want to commend Sen. Collins for her courageous act.





Regrettably, 48 of 54 Republican U.S. senators have declared they will not support Garland’s nomination. They have reached that conclusion without benefit of holding public hearings on his background or judicial outlook, and 45 of them have opposed holding hearings. Their opposition does not stand up to scrutiny. As chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the court on which he has served for nearly 20 years, Garland is clearly qualified. Praised for his intellect and decency, he is widely seen as a centrist, and his opinions have rarely drawn a dissent.

The argument that it’s too close to the presidential election to consider a nominee simply doesn’t hold water. The president and senators have an obligation to perform their duties during the duration of their term of office. We understand that 14 previous presidents have nominated a total of 21 justices during presidential election years. Since the Senate has never taken longer than 125 days to vote on a candidate from the time of nomination, with the average nominee confirmed, rejected or withdrawn in 25 days, there is plenty of time in which to conduct hearings and hold a vote.

What is lacking is a commitment to the orderly functioning of government, to justice, to the right of every American to be heard. Instead, the majority of the U.S. Senate has chosen to make weak excuses about why they won’t do the job their constituents elected them to and expect them to perform.

In addition, the blocking of Garland’s nomination is only the most recent and high-profile example of obstruction that has been taking place for years and left our federal courts without adequate numbers of judges to ensure the American people can have their day in court. As of today there are a total of 81 vacant judgeships across the country, with 29 of those unfilled positions resulting in workloads so high as to be declared a judicial emergency. Of the 57 nominees put forward by the president, 19 await a vote by the full Senate while 38 languish in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

There’s no excuse for that kind of foot-dragging. We need our federal courts to function and to reach decisions on the host of issues brought before them that shape our daily lives. Important issues, from civil and human rights to voting and campaign finance laws to environmental issues such as the EPA’s effort to control greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act to access to health care including the right of women to make their own private reproductive decisions, are addressed in the federal courts. These matters are far too important to be caught up in partisan maneuvering.

Refusing to hold hearings and take an up or down vote on nominees is a dereliction of duty and an insult to the American people. We urge Collins and King to continue to do all in their power to insist that their colleagues in leadership and on the Senate Judiciary Committee take swift action not only on the nomination of Merrick Garland but also on the 56 nominees to lower federal courts.

Collins wryly pointed out that if their presidential candidate is not elected come November, Republicans in the Senate may wish they had acted on Garland’s nomination. We would add that the average age of retirement from the Supreme Court has been 79: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 83, Justice Anthony Kennedy will be 80 in July, Justice Stephen Breyer will be 78 in August. Should the Senate continue to obstruct Garland’s nomination, the next president could name as many as four members of the Supreme Court.

The U.S. Senate has plenty to do. It’s time they got this job done.

Sherry Huber and Roger Berle are Republican members of the Board of Directors of the Maine Conservation Voters.