U.S. Senator Mitt Romney is being highly criticized Tuesday, after he announced he will vote to confirm President Donald Trump’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, even before the candidate has been named.

CNN’s take is that Senator Romney’s “backing of Supreme Court vote paves way for election-year confirmation.”

Romney said he would vote for any nominee who is qualified, although he struggled to define what the term meant to him.

Many are attacking the Utah Republican Senator for green lighting Trump’s unnamed SCOTUS nominee despite voting to impeach the president.

Former Dept. of Defense communications official:

Imagine simultaneously believing the President of the United States violated the constitution & is so unfit for office he must be removed from the White House but also being totally on board with his judgment for a lifetime Supreme Court seat — Adam Blickstein (@AdamBlickstein) September 22, 2020

Sen. Romney also made several remarks, both to reporters (video below) and in a statement, that are provably false.

Mitt Romney: “I recognize that we may have a Court which has more of a conservative bent than it has had over the last few decades, but my liberal friends have over many decades gotten used to the idea of having a liberal court and that’s not written in the stars.” pic.twitter.com/0lXXcAGrjQ — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 22, 2020

“The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own,” Romney said in a statement.

Journalist Joan McCarter points out that’s false.

Well, except for 1988 when a Democratic Senate confirmed Ronald Reagan’s nominee, Anthony Kennedy. Except for that “historical precedent of election year nominations.” https://t.co/yOnk78NIMu — Joan McCarter (@joanmccarter) September 22, 2020

Civil rights attorney Sasha Samberg-Champion blasts Romney for cloaking a purely political decision in the rule of law.

This is a ridiculous statement. It suggests that an inherently political decision is not, in fact, based on politics, but instead on “law” and “precedent,” neither of which have anything to do with this. https://t.co/eixFJhvKwG — Sasha Samberg-Champion (@ssamcham) September 22, 2020

Historian Kevin Kruse:

This “historical precedent” is so pathetically weasel-worded I’m actually embarrassed *for* you. https://t.co/1vvrKUkeUP — Kevin M. Kruse (@KevinMKruse) September 22, 2020

Reporter and analyst for Inside Elections, Jacob Rubashkin, notes just how false Romney’s claim is that America is a “center-right” nation – and embarrasses him in the process:

The GOP has lost 6 of 7 popular votes over the last 30 years. That the US is a “center right” country is not particularly borne out in the voting history — if it were, Romney would have a different title than “Senator.” https://t.co/RUtv8X4zGI — Jacob Rubashkin (@JacobRubashkin) September 22, 2020

As does journalist Jay Willis:

ROMNEY: [runs a center-right campaign to be the literal President of the United States, loses by four points, is immediately stuffed in the garbage can by his party as it lurches far to the right] ROMNEY: my worldview is obviously shared by a majority of the country — Jay Willis (@jaywillis) September 22, 2020

Romney’s false claims that the Supreme Court has been liberal for years is also easily debunked as “utter nonsense” – by Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at a conservative think tank:

Romney’s statement is utter nonsense. A liberal court? Besides Citizens United, Shelby County and many other anti-voter rulings, anti-labor, pro-business, anti-Civil Rights. Center-right? This would be radical right, Federalist Society to the max. — Norman Ornstein (@NormOrnstein) September 22, 2020

And by this HuffPost journalist:

The court hasn’t had a liberal majority since 1969.

The country is only center-right if you consider the Democratic Party center-right, which Romney does not.

The Republican Party has won the presidential popular vote just once over the last three decades. https://t.co/VhuwhoKUuO — Paul Blumenthal (@PaulBlu) September 22, 2020

More:

“The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own.” That’s the fanciest way of saying “it’s all about power baby” I have ever seen. https://t.co/llnYImFhbz — National Security Counselors (@NatlSecCnslrs) September 22, 2020

There. Is. No. Such. Thing. As. A. Moral. Republican. https://t.co/WcEhOm22jL — Jessie defund police shut it all down Losch🗽🇺🇾 (@JessieLosch) September 22, 2020

You’ll always be the dude who tried to iron his shirt while wearing it, and absolutley nothing more. https://t.co/Xu1PGpD1zI — Ryan Barr (@RADMANRBARR) September 22, 2020

Take back the presidency. Take back the Senate. Pack the courts. There are no “norms” if Republicans keep making up rules that apply only to them. https://t.co/D3oaBcE2O1 — Hemant Mehta (@hemantmehta) September 22, 2020

“Sure, I thought that @realDonaldTrump should be removed from office when he was impeached, but since he wasn’t I will reward him by voting for his Supreme Court nominee.” https://t.co/onwr9QaMdc — *you’re (@RKJ65) September 22, 2020

No one seems to understand: Mitt Romney, in the end, is a member of the many cults that want to own women’s uteruses. How could he pass up a chance? https://t.co/3dVtNqOUzx — Michelangelo Signorile, subscribe to my newsletter (@MSignorile) September 22, 2020

Image via Shutterstock