By Selwyn Duke

“The duties of the Senate are set forth in the U.S. Constitution. Nowhere in that document does it say the Senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote. It says appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. That is very different than saying every nominee receives a vote.” The preceding is certainly a view one could take with respect to Obama’s Supreme Court (SC) nominee, Judge Merrick Garland (shown). Another view is that the president is “doing his job … they [Senate Republicans] should do theirs.” The first position was taken by liberal Nevada Senator Harry Reid.

The second position was taken by someone he knows well: liberal Nevada senator Harry Reid.

The first statement was made in 2005 on the Senate floor and dealt with the matter of President George W. Bush’s nominees. The second was made just yesterday and concerned Obama’s Garland pick.

Of course, Reid isn’t alone in giving voters more than their money’s worth (two faces for the price of one), as both Democrats and Republicans have a history of making contradictory statements on SC nominees. Nonetheless, Reid’s first statement was correct; he’s also right in saying the senators should do their job. Since their job is to appoint a judge who’ll do his job, however, it’s important to know what a judge’s job is.

Read the rest here.