In early October of 1987, when President Ronald Reagan had more than a year left on his final term that would end in January of 1989, The New York Times editorial board openly championed the idea of the United States Senate blocking Reagan’s Supreme Court nomination. Their rationale? The fact that Democrats had regained control of the Senate in 1986.
The editorial was titled “Against Robert Bork; His Bill of Rights Is Different“:
The President’s supporters insist vehemently that, having won the 1984 election, he has every right to try to change the Court’s direction. Yes, but the Democrats won the 1986 election, regaining control of the Senate, and they have every right to resist. This is not the same Senate that confirmed William Rehnquist as Chief Justice and Antonin Scalia as an associate justice last year.
In 2014, Republicans regained control of the Senate. Don’t look for The New York Times, or their lemmings in the DC Media, to make this exact same argument.
Justice Antonin Scalia died in late February of 2016, the final year of Obama’s presidency and right in the middle of a hotly contested presidential election.
Reagan first nominated Bork in July of 1987, a full 18 months before he would leave office.
Hat tip: Twitter.
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.