Democrats’ Supreme Court Hypocrisy Never Ends

Yesterday, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dick Durbin, told CNN’s State of the Union that he has “reached out to many Republicans, asking them to keep an open mind and to meet with Ketanji Brown Jackson, ask the hard questions, ask for materials — we’ll provide them. It’s in the best interest . . . of the U.S. Senate for this to be bipartisan.”

Is it? In October 2020, Durbin announced that he would be a “no” on Amy Coney Barrett before asking her a single “hard question” or requesting any “materials,” as did a bunch of other Democrats. Did Durbin have an open mind on Barrett? Or Brett Kavanaugh? Then–minority leader Chuck Schumer, as well as members of the Judiciary Committee such as Richard Blumenthal and Mazie Hirono — who not only spread fake rape allegations about Kavanaugh but argued that the nominee didn’t deserve the presumption of innocence — refused to even meet with Barrett. Schumer claimed that the Barrett nomination would “go down as one of the darkest days in the 231-year history of the United States Senate.” Was that in the best interest of a bipartisan Senate?

About the Author

David Harsanyi

David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner.

Featured Tags

Yesterday, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dick Durbin, told CNN’s State of the Union that he has “reached out to many Republicans, asking them to keep an open mind and to meet with Ketanji Brown Jackson, ask the hard questions, ask for materials — we’ll provide them. It’s in the best interest . . . of the U.S. Senate for this to be bipartisan.”

Is it? In October 2020, Durbin announced that he would be a “no” on Amy Coney Barrett before asking her a single “hard question” or requesting any “materials,” as did a bunch of other Democrats. Did Durbin have an open mind on Barrett? Or Brett Kavanaugh? Then–minority leader Chuck Schumer, as well as members of the Judiciary Committee such as Richard Blumenthal and Mazie Hirono — who not only spread fake rape allegations about Kavanaugh but argued that the nominee didn’t deserve the presumption of innocence — refused to even meet with Barrett. Schumer claimed that the Barrett nomination would “go down as one of the darkest days in the 231-year history of the United States Senate.” Was that in the best interest of a bipartisan Senate?