In the last couple weeks, the Obama Administration has come under pressure to show results from its efforts to get Merrick Garland onto the Supreme Court. In a desperate move, the Administration is now trying to regain the initiative by talking up Garland’s academic and vocational credentials.

The obvious weakness in this strategy is that Senator Obama didn’t think qualifications were such a big deal back when he was considering the nominations of Judge Roberts and Judge Alito for the Supreme Court. Here’s what Senator Obama gushed about Roberts in 2005:

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind Judge Roberts is qualified to sit on the highest court in the land. Moreover, he seems to have the comportment and the temperament that makes for a good judge. He is humble, he is personally decent, and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. It is absolutely clear to me that Judge Roberts truly loves the law. He couldn’t have achieved his excellent record as an advocate before the Supreme Court without that passion for the law, and it became apparent to me in our conversation that he does, in fact, deeply respect the basic precepts that go into deciding 95 percent of the cases that come before the Federal court-adherence to precedence, a certain modesty in reading statutes and constitutional text, a respect for procedural regularity, and an impartiality in presiding over the adversarial system. All of these characteristics make me want to vote for Judge Roberts.

But empathy, you see . . .

The problem I face — a problem that has been voiced by some of my other colleagues, both those who are voting for Mr. Roberts and those who are voting against Mr. Roberts — is that while adherence to legal precedent and rules of statutory or constitutional construction will dispose of 95 percent of the cases that come before a court, so that both a Scalia and a Ginsburg will arrive at the same place most of the time on those 95 percent of the cases-what matters on the Supreme Court is those 5 percent of cases that are truly difficult. In those cases, adherence to precedent and rules of construction and interpretation will only get you through the 25th mile of the marathon. That last mile can only be determined on the basis of one’s deepest values, one’s core concerns, one’s broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one’s empathy.

Plainly put, Senator Obama didn’t like Roberts’s judicial philosophy, so he opposed confirmation.

In 2006, he recognized Alito’s qualifications:

I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe it calls for meaningful advice and consent and that includes an examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology, and record. . . . I have no doubt Judge Alito has the training and qualifications necessary to serve. As has been already stated, he has received the highest rating from the ABA. He is an intelligent man and an accomplished jurist. There is no indication that he is not a man of fine character.

And then proceeded to filibuster Alito because of his judicial philosophy. The Administration’s new tack is just more proof that President Obama and his allies will say and do anything to create the most liberal Supreme Court majority in decades.