To the Editor:

I understand that our Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The majority Republican members of the committee are opposed to vetting any nominee for the position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court that may be nominated by President Obama. I believe that Sen. Tillis’ position and that of the majority members of the committee in this matter are wrong.

Article II Section 2 of the U. S. Constitution states that:  “… he (referring to the President) shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... judges of the Supreme Court….” The President should confer with the Senate for advice then nominate a candidate. The Judiciary Committee’s job is to do the preliminary vetting before passing it the Senate.  

I know of no incidence in recent history when this process has been circumvented and sidetracked for political reasons. True, Robert Bork’s nomination was sent to the Senate floor with an unfavorable recommendation, but it was still sent to the floor. The nomination of Clarence Thomas was sent to the floor with only one nay vote and was sent without recommendation of any kind on the second vote of the Judiciary Committee. Scalia’s nomination was forwarded with a unanimous vote of 18-0 with all minority Democrats as well as the majority Republicans on the committee voting to move the nomination on to the Senate. 

To deny a hearing of a nominee and forwarding that nominee on to the Senate for purely political reasons is to deny the President the ability to do his job. Perhaps, that is what this is about.  

Our governmental system is currently gridlocked and fairly inoperative. To hamper the function of the Supreme Court by withholding the proper process as outlined by the Constitution is unconscionable. Let me be perfectly blunt. I am not a Democrat. I am registered to vote in the North Carolina as unaffiliated. But I do vote, and I have since Richard Nixon was President.  For the Judiciary Committee to not take this up means that the Judiciary Committee is abrogating its job and function. That would mean that Sen. Tillis, as a member of that committee and being in agreement with the Republican majority position,  would be remiss in doing his job as a senator. 

Sen. Tillis, if you cannot or will not do your job, get out of Washington and come home. As a taxpayer, I do not wish nor need to pay your salary for you to ignore your duty and responsibilities in this matter. 

Luther Jones

Sylva