Connecticut Senate Bill SR00011

Connecticut 2016 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/29/16
• Report Pass: 3/29/16

Caption

Resolution Memorializing The United States Senate To Conduct Confirmation Hearings For The President's Nominee To Fill The Vacancy On The United States Supreme Court.

Impact

The resolution draws attention to several pending Supreme Court cases that could significantly influence public policy on issues such as electoral reapportionment, reproductive rights, and gun control laws. The uncertainty surrounding the Court's decisions on these matters, due to the reduced number of Justices, is of paramount concern. The resolution highlights that decisions resulting from deadlock could leave critical areas of law unsettled, potentially leading to inconsistent legal interpretations and the undermining of established legal precedents. It underscores how the absence of a full Supreme Court could leave citizens without clear legal protections and disrupt the judicial process in important respects.

Summary

Senate Resolution No. 11, introduced by Senator Duff, is a memorialization directed at the United States Senate, urging the Senate to proceed with confirmation hearings for Merrick Garland, the President's nominee to fill the vacancy left by the passing of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. The resolution is rooted in the concern that without a full bench of nine Justices, the U.S. Supreme Court's ability to adjudicate vital legal cases may be compromised, leading to uncertainty in the law, which could disproportionately affect citizens across Connecticut and beyond. The bill emphasizes the necessity of filling this judicial vacancy in accordance with Article II of the United States Constitution, which delineates the President's authority to nominate Justices with the advice and consent of the Senate.

Contention

A notable point of contention surrounding the resolution is the Senate leadership's stated refusal to conduct any confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominees until after the 2016 presidential election. Critics may view this position as an obstruction of the constitutional process, which requires the Senate to evaluate Presidential nominations. Proponents of the resolution argue for the urgent need to adhere to constitutional norms and facilitate a timely appointment to restore full functionality to the Supreme Court, thereby ensuring that national legal matters are adjudicated effectively and equitably.