I wish to commend Alan Jackson for the tone of his reasoned and evidence-based letter (“Response to letters, editorial cartoon,” page A4, March 25 Herald).

While I disagree with most of his conclusions, his letter is an excellent example of high-minded civil discourse currently in such short supply. Now, to my disagreement.

The contention that the Senate’s refusal to consider the confirmation of Judge Garland is somehow justified is simply erroneous. The late Justice Scalia would no doubt agree that the inaction of Senate Republicans runs counter to the intent of the Constitution’s framers. The Senate has the right to vote down the President’s choice, but refusing consideration runs counter to the framers’ design.

I shall prove the framers’ intent by citing the confirmation of Chief Justice John Marshall in 1801. Mr. Marshall was appointed in January by lame-duck President John Adams after he had been defeated in November by Thomas Jefferson. Soon after New Year’s, the Chief Justice informed the President he was resigning for health reasons and Mr. Adams, with two months left in office (inauguration then took place on March 4) nominated John Marshall to fill the vacancy. The lame-duck Senate, many of whom had lost their seats in November, confirmed Marshall in short order.

This sounds like underhanded political skullduggery, so how can I claim that it demonstrates the Founders’ intent? I do so for several reasons.

— A third of the Senate was made up of Adams’ opposition party, yet Marshall’s nomination was approved by a simple voice vote with no roll call vote requested.

— Many members of that Sixth Congress were men who had been at the Constitutional Convention or had participated in state conventions that ratified the document. Hence, it was the clear understanding and intent of the Founders that if a legitimately elected President sent them a qualified candidate for the nation’s highest court, it was their duty to “advise and consent” on that nomination.

Again, I defer to the great textualist Scalia, who would tell us those 18th century words “advise and consent” would be analogous to today’s “weigh and consider.” Clearly, the GOP senators are shirking their sworn Constitutional duties.

Tom DeBor
Poulsbo