Who Can Save Merrick Garland ?

Based on The Washington Post's article.

The decision of President Barack Obama to nominate Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court sparked a debate still raging toda, and the Senate still won't give him a hearing.

Merrick Garland: Photo /
United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit /
Wikimedia Commons
.
.

"Despite Democratic organizing efforts, right-leaning activists care more about the Supreme Court vacancy right now than liberals do," The Washington Post writes on Thursday 24 March. 

When President Obama announced Garland's nomination on March 16, he hoped this White man, which "by all accounts is more of a technocrat than an ideologue", would not pose too much of a problem for Republicans. Yet the Senate won't give him a hearing.

And Liberals "privately complain that Obama has thrown away a golden opportunity." The Capitol newspaper explains : "If he had picked an African American, a Latino or even an Asian candidate – and especially a woman – he could have helped energize the coalition that got him reelected in 2012 and arguably pushed his nominee onto the court."

So why such a rebuttal on the Republican side ? Judge Garland, at the Court of Appeal since 1997, has taken numerous decisions against the NRA. Chris Cox, the Association's political strategist, deems that Garland "does not support the Second Amendment," and that “the future of gun ownership hangs in the balance.”

This is the argument taken up by Republican politicans and their electoral base: to give a chance to Merrick Garland at the Supreme Court would be a threat to their right to bear arms. Winsconsin Sen. Ron Johnson goes further and thinks it would threaten “their right to free speech” and their “freedom of religion.”

Read this article (in French) on Courrier International's website