September 23, 2016
Private: What I Learned This Week From Supreme Court Nominee Merrick Garland
Ashley Lawrence
by Ashley Lawrence, co-president, ACS Student Chapter at Howard University School of Law
On Tuesday Sept. 20, the Howard Law community celebrated Constitution Day commemorating the signing of the Constitution by our country’s Founding Fathers on Sept. 17, 1787. Among the many relevant words within the living, breathing document are those contained in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 which states: “The President […] shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint […] judges of the Supreme Court.” At present—more than 191 days after nomination —Supreme Court nominee and U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Merrick Garland awaits confirmation and has yet to receive even a hearing for a seat on the United States Supreme Court.
The guest for Howard Law’s celebration of Constitution Day was none other than Chief Judge Merrick Garland. The lively “Arm Chair Conversation” between Chief Judge Garland and Howard Law Dean Danielle Holley-Walker was thought provoking and left me with two main takeaways. One—this is the longest any Supreme Court nominee has waited to be confirmed. His nomination is all the more important because his role in the federal judiciary, which plays a significant role in making decisions that address critical constitutional and civil rights issues, is currently diminished. Two—it is imperative that we learn in law school how crucial it is to participate in public interest opportunities and continue to commit to public service in our legal careers by investing in our communities to ensure the legal rights of society’s most vulnerable. Chief Judge Garland has demonstrated this commitment by volunteering with students from J.O. Wilson Elementary School for the past 18 years and by participating in the Annual Judicial Reception here at Howard Law for the past 14 years.
As Dean Holley-Walker listed the many accolades of Chief Judge Garland: from his clerkship with former Supreme Court Associate Justice William J. Brennan, to his time as an associate and partner at Arnold & Porter, his career as a federal prosecutor that involved high profile cases and as a federal appellate judge —it became clear that he is well-qualified for the job. On March 16, 2016, President Obama fulfilled his constitutional duty and nominated Chief Judge Garland to the Supreme Court after the unfortunate and unexpected passing of Justice Antonin Scalia in February. The Senate majority, however, has taken the unprecedented path of completely obstructing the process and has refused to even allow Chief Judge Garland the opportunity to answer questions at a public hearing, as is customary for judicial nominees. Sadly, this is true not only for Chief Judge Garland, but for over 50 other Article II judicial nominees who are awaiting action in a Senate that is abdicating their constitutional duty to provide “advice and consent” and help fill vacancies that currently compose more than 10% of the judiciary.
As a law student, I am disheartened by this complete refusal to even consider a nominee to the Supreme Court. The Senate’s refusal to act has resulted in a number of 4-4 decisions that affirm lower court decisions. Leaving the U.S. Supreme Court without a critical ninth member is a disservice to the American people who deserve a fully functioning judiciary. As the president of the American Constitution Society student chapter at Howard Law, I firmly believe that the law should be a force to improve the lives of all people and the Senate can do just that by considering Chief Judge Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court.