CWA’s Legal Counsel Mario Diaz sent the following letter to the editor to the Philadelphia Inquirer in response to this op-ed by a Temple law professor and former clerk of Judge Merrick Garland.
Dear Editor,
Craig Green’s recent opinion piece (“Garland deserves a fair hearing, Sen. Toomey”) shows a rather remarkably myopic view of history, especially for a law professor. He writes, “No Supreme Court nominee in history has been rejected – much less denied a hearing – simply because a Senate majority used its muscle to demand nominees that fit its ideological preference.”
Does he expect to be taken seriously with that kind of a statement? I’m sure he is well aware of the now-verb to be “borked.” It references the infamous way a Senate Democrat majority savagely attacked the highly qualified nominee Robert Bork “simply because” the nominee did not “fit its ideological preference.”
I can understand Mr. Green’s passionate defense of his former boss, but his mischaracterization of Senate history is a great example of the sort of manipulation of facts that has poisoned the nomination process in the first place.
Sincerely,
Mario Diaz
Legal Counsel
Concerned Women for America