Somewhere Alexander Hamilton is smiling. For the battle that’s beginning over President Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court vindicates the famous Founder’s assurances on judicial appointments.
Hamilton knew that Americans would find their protection from would-be kings in the wisdom of the Senate. He marked this point in Federalist 69, one of the columns he wrote back in 1788 under the pen name Publius.
The topic of Federalist 69 is the “real character of the executive.” It makes it clear that in filling the seat once held by Justice Antonin Scalia, President Obama is at the complete mercy of the Senate — and should be.
The President is to nominate, and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint ambassadors and other public ministers, judges of the Supreme Court, and in general all officers of the United States established by law...
The king of Great Britain is emphatically and truly styled the fountain of honor. He not only appoints to all offices, but can create offices. He can confer titles of nobility at pleasure; and has the disposal of an immense number of church preferments. There is evidently a great inferiority in the power of the President, in this particular, to that of the British king...
In the national government, if the Senate should be divided, no appointment could be made...
It is divided, and for the moment, no appointment will be made.
[HT: Our Founding Truth]
4 comments:
First of all, Hamilton was being descriptive and not prescriptive. He was describing the theoretical and proposed structure of the presidency and not alluding to the cynical and tactical use of constitutional provisions to advance party interests. His concern was for the prerogative of the president vs. the prerogative of a king.
Second of all, Hamilton was for a strong presidency and it’s hard to imagine him advocating for a Senate blocking presidential appointments in order to instill gridlock. Since his was a theoretical argument it rested upon the good faith of the players with respect to actual governance.
The phrase “advise and consent” does not mean “shut the whole thing down for as long as necessary solely because you don’t like the president and are seeking political partisan advantage among the party’s base.” There’s not the thinnest veil over the raw partisan move that’s at the heart of the current supreme-court fiasco.
The phrase “advise and consent” does not mean “shut the whole thing down for as long as necessary solely because you don’t like the president and are seeking political partisan advantage among the party’s base.”
Actually the phrase
In the national government, if the Senate should be divided, no appointment could be made...
would mean that in the national government, if the Senate should be divided, no appointment could be made.
TVD - your analysis and assertion about Hamilton and the selection and approval process for SCOTUS justices could not be more incorrect. Your cramped argument is mere word-smithing and cherry-picking.
I do not need to refute your argument or lack of historical accuracy here, because the Brennan Center has already done it, with links to primary sources from Hamilton, Madison and Iredell.
http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/shun-presidents-supreme-court-nominee-alexander-hamilton-would-not-be-pleased
Hold up on that victory dance, tough guy. Seth Barrett Tillman has refuted you, and them.
http://reformclub.blogspot.com/2016/04/seth-barrett-tillman-obama-vs-marbury-v.html
Further, these arguments by proxy are less than useless: Your source put a lot of words in Hamilton's mouth, and completely ignored Federalist 69, which I quoted directly and bears on the issue explicitly. It would be bad enough arguing Hamilton against Hamilton, but you're just ignoring the stronger, more explicit case for a weaker inferential one.
That's sophistry, by definition. Clean it up, professor. Your smugness and snideness are unjustified. Next time you think you have a case, lay it out in your own words instead of hiding behind a link and wasting my time.
Post a Comment