U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley has not decided whether he will vote to confirm Ketanji Brown Jackson to the nation’s highest court, Iowa’s senior senator said Wednesday during a call with reporters.
“I may make up my mind on Friday or Saturday,” he said, adding that he’ll announce his decision Monday, the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on her nomination. “I’m going to read some more things between now and Saturday.”
Surprisingly, nobody laughed out loud at this statement. Grassley has been little but a party hack for at least the past two decades. Expect him to make up some flimsy, gauzy explanation of why he will vote against one of the most qualified nominees to the SCOTUS ever. His explanations of such votes are always good for a laugh.
Many will be amazed if he votes for Judge Jackson. But as usual Grassley is creating the aura of being a solon, a man above the tawdry fray of partisan politics. This will, of course, play very well among the citizens of Iowa who will view Grassley’s ruse of prudent consideration as a mark of him being a great statesman.
Remember this is the same Grassley who only a handful of years ago refused to let his committee – The Judiciary Committee – hold hearings on the nomination of Merrick Garland for a year, thus changing the current usual number of justices to 8.
This is also the same Grassley who threw off the shackles of his own impromptu rules on Merrick Garland in order to rush through the nomination of an extremely poorly qualified Amy Coney Barret.
This is also the same Grassley who couldn’t wait to put fun guy frat boy Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court. Grassley is very flexible at shape shifting into what looks good to the Trump backers of the moment.
From the Register article, we see Grassley setting up his flimsy excuses for his ponderous statement Monday, which I think many of us can already guess:
“He also said, however, that she sidestepped some questions, especially on whether she believes in expanding the Supreme Court. Grassley has also been critical of the process saying he is disappointed some records of Jackson’s records requested were not made available to the committee.
Defending “the institution” of the court — especially from increasing the number of justices — is one of Grassley’s top concerns as he evaluates Jackson, he reiterated Wednesday. He said he is weighing Jackson’s commitment to the original text of the U.S. Constitution and how she would rule on some matters including poorly written legislation.
“Let’s say there’s a bleeping hole in the law. Does she feel like she should fill that in — or not?” he said. “
Can’t wait for the Democratic primary so Iowans can see what the differences are between a candidate that will work for the people of Iowa and this bumbling, fumbling excuse of a party hack.