Senate Republican says lawmakers can't 'boil down' what a Court nominee would do in one case like Roe v. Wade

Senate Republican says lawmakers can't 'boil down' what a Court nominee would do in one case like Roe v. Wade
© Greg Nash

Sen. Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeCawthorn, Lee introduce bills banning interstate travel vaccine mandate Retreating economy creates new hurdle for Democrats in 2022 McConnell vows GOP won't help raise debt ceiling in December after Schumer 'tantrum' MORE (R-Utah) said on Sunday that lawmakers can’t “boil down” what a Supreme Court nominee would do in one case, such as Roe v. Wade, when determining whether to support a justice’s confirmation.

Lee responded to ABC’s George StephanopoulosGeorge Robert StephanopoulosAuthor of controversial Trump Russia dossier speaks out: 'I stand by the work we did' Biden giving stiff-arm to press interviews Yellen confident of minimum global corporate tax passage in Congress MORE’s question about what the confirmation of President TrumpDonald TrumpHillicon Valley — Presented by Xerox — Twitter's algorithm boosts right-leaning content, internal study finds Ohio Democrat calls Vance an 'ass----' over Baldwin tweet Matt Taibbi says Trump's rhetoric caused public perception of US intelligence services to shift MORE’s nominee Amy Coney BarrettAmy Coney BarrettA politicized Supreme Court? That was the point Solid majority believes Supreme Court rulings based more on politics than law  Locked and Loaded: Supreme Court is ready for a showdown on the Second Amendment MORE to the Supreme Court would mean for the landmark abortion case. 

“You know, only time can tell what will happen to any one precedent,” he said. 

“In any event, you can't look at the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice and boil down that jurist's contribution to the law, past and future, to what they might do with a single case,” he added.

 

The Utah Republican added that “overruling a precedent” is “a lot more complicated than people might think.”

He also labeled Barrett as a judge with “an incredible background.” 

ADVERTISEMENT
“This is a judge who will bring her expertise to the table,” he said. “And it will be brought to bear on a whole wide variety of scenarios, just as Ruth Bader GinsburgRuth Bader GinsburgKatie Couric says she felt 'betrayed' by Lauer after sexual assault allegations Couric defends editing of RBG interview Biden's Supreme Court commission ends not with a bang but a whimper MORE's expertise was brought to bear in her cases.”

Trump officially nominated Barrett, an appeals court judge, to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court on Saturday, following Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death on Sept. 18.

Several Senate Republicans have said a nominee’s position on Roe v. Wade is central to whether they confirm her, despite other GOP senators who would rather discuss her general judicial temperament.

Republicans have moved to push the confirmation process forward, as the 2020 election lingers now 37 days away. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellBiden says he's open to altering, eliminating filibuster to advance voting rights Pelosi says GOP senators 'voted to aid and abet' voter suppression for blocking revised elections bill Manchin insists he hasn't threatened to leave Democrats MORE (R-Ky.) has vowed to vote on Trump’s nominee, despite his position to block Merrick GarlandMerrick GarlandTrustmark Bank to pay million 'redlining' fine The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Uber - Manchin, Sanders in budget feud; Biden still upbeat Biden: Comment that DOJ should prosecute those who defy subpoenas 'not appropriate' MORE’s confirmation hearing four years ago for being too close to the election.

The Senate leader said the current situation is different because the same party heads the White House and the Senate. Former President Obama nominated Garland nine months before the 2016 election.