The Senate Must Vote on Judge Garland's Nomination

While pursuing Facebook yesterday, I came across a post from Michelle Malkin on President Obama's nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. The post was a link to an article in the Conservative Review simply entitled, "What Conservatives Need to Know About Merrick Garland."  When I clicked the link, I was shocked to find a one word answer as the first paragraph of the article. It simply said, "Nothing."

Author Brian Darling's analysis didn't get much more informative. The crux of his argument was that because Judge Garland was nominated by President Obama, he is a liberal and will tip the balance on the Supreme Court in favor of the liberals. 

I was shocked because even though I consider myself a Republican with conservative leanings, my reaction to President Obama's pick was far different. I was surprised by how non-controversial the appointment would be. 

Judge Garland has sat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit since 1997.  He is currently the Chief Judge.  Because of the location of the DC Circuit, it is the court that tends to hear cases involving Federal policy most often. The court is often considered a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. 

In addition, Judge Garland is a former prosecutor who is 63 years old. Not only has he worked in law enforcement, he is not likely to stick around the Supreme Court for a very long time. 

At this point, conservatives point to two cases in which he was involved to ring the alarm bells that he will rob us all of our gun rights. The first is the case that overturned the District of Columbia's gun control law. The case was decided by a three judge panel, and Judge Garland voted for the case to be reheard en banc, which means in front of all of the judges of the DC Circuit. 

The second was a case where Judge Garland agreed that the FBI could retain gun purchase records for six months to ensure that a computerized background check was working. 

Neither case hardly says anything about the Judge's views on the Second Amendment. Yet it is enough that Judge Garland acted in a way displeasing to the NRA for conservatives to mobilize opposition by engaging in the Second Amendment fear mongering. 

Conservatives are mourning the loss of Justice Antonin Scalia. The prospect that his seat on the Supreme Court could be filled by an Obama appointee is just devastating to them. Thus, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell took the unprecedented step of announcing that there would be no hearings on any Obama nomination. Instead, the choice would be left to the new president. President Obama has countered with the nomination of a highly respected jurist, who is not likely to stay around for a very long time. The result is that Senate Republicans look far worse than just merely obstructionists. They look like whiny, petulant children. 

One of the most frightening characteristics of the Tea Party movement, and its influence on the Republican Party, has been the uncompromising willingness to shut down normal government functions in the name of promoting conservatism. Faced with very little on the record to challenge a nominee who appears to be eminently qualified, the conservatives resort to fear mongering. Senate leaders should not play this game. Rather, they should do their constitutional duty of allowing the full Senate to give advice and consent by holding hearings on Judge Garland, and sending his nomination to the floor for a vote. 

Is Immigration Reform Around the Corner?

One of the emerging themes from the aftermath of the 2012 presidential election is the notion that the Republican Party must evolve to appeal to demographics other than caucasians.  More specifically, analysts say that Romney lost the Latino vote by a margin of 70% to 30%.  This is the widest margin since Bob Dole lost the White House in 1996.  Latinos are the largest growing ethnic group.  With the changing American electorate, many are saying that the Republicans must attract more Latino voters to be competitive in future elections.

The first step, according to conservative talk show host Sean Hannity, is "to get rid of the immigration issue altogether."Hannity surprised many in his audience by announcing that he has "evolved" on the issue of immigration reform.  Hannity urged that securing the borders had to be the top priority, but that there ought to be a "pathway to citizenship" for those who are already here and who do not have a criminal record.

Hannity is not the only conservative voicing a willingness to address immigration reform.  Speaker of the House of Representatives , John Boehner, stated, "A comprehensive approach is long overdue, and I'm confident that the president, myself, others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all."

On the campaign trail, Republican Florida Senator, Marco Rubio, addressing the issue of young people brought to this country as children, stated that the United States need to find a solution, more permanent than the President's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, that was "humanitarian," and "that solves their problem but that doesn’t encourage illegal immigration in the future."

Given these statements by leading conservatives, there appears to be a possibility that immigration reform will be on the agenda for the next Congress.  The big question is what that reform will look like.

In one of the rare instances where Republican candidate Mitt Romney addressed immigration during the Fall campaign, he stated that graduates with degrees in math and science should "get a green card stapled to their diploma."  In September, a bill written by the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Lamar Smith, came up for a vote.  The bill would have increased the number of visas made available for graduates with advanced degrees in science and technology, but would have also eliminated the diversity visa program.  Representative Michael McCaul from Texas likewise mentions ending the diversity lottery while increasing the number of visas for graduates with advanced math and science degrees when discussing immigration reform.

The time may very well be right for comprehensive immigration reform.  But exactly what shape that reform will take, and whether it will include a pathway to citizenship for the undocumented aliens currently in the United States remains to be seen.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com