7 Pages Posted: 16 Jun 2016 Last revised: 20 Jul 2016
Date Written: June 14, 2016
In The Garland Affair, we present historical evidence to suggest that Senate Republicans’ current plan to prevent President Obama from appointing a replacement for Justice Scalia, regardless of the particular merits of his nominees, is historically unprecedented. The plan thus raises a set of pragmatic and constitutional risks that have not yet been fully appreciated and warrant reconsideration of this plan. Michael Ramsey has recently raised several questions about our constitutional analysis. Here we respond to those questions.
Keywords: Garland, Scalia, Obama, Appointment, Vacancy, Supreme Court, Confirmation, Politicization, Grassley, McConnell, separation of powers, presidential power, executive power, advice, consent, advice and consent, whelan
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Kar, Robin Bradley and Mazzone, Jason, Reply to Michael Ramsey on the Garland Affair (June 14, 2016). University of Illinois College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 16-28. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2795723