Supreme Court confirmation was a victory for process
Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, right, meets with then-Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson in Washington on March 29. Credit: The Washington Post/Bill O'Leary
One of the more poignant images out of Washington last week was the sight of Mitt Romney standing and applauding in the chamber of the United States Senate.
The Utah Republican was reacting to the confirmation of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court — alone. He stood there clapping as his fellow Republicans quickly exited, and kept clapping after they were gone.
Romney, one of three Republicans to vote for Jackson, understood the import of the moment; she became the first Black woman to join the court. But Romney also was applauding something more important than the ascension of Jackson — the victory of process.
The Senate had fulfilled its role to advise and consent. Most of its members, Romney among them, had met with the judge. Despite his differences with her, he said she was well-qualified. A panel of senators conducted a hearing, which drifted into grotesque sideshow during certain questioning but nevertheless was part of a time-honored process. Then the Senate voted, a step tarnished by the disrespect of several of Romney’s colleagues - Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul, Jim Inhofe and Jerry Moran - who voted from the Senate cloakroom since they apparently were not wearing ties and therefore not allowed onto the Senate floor, a rule with which each was familiar. None voted for Jackson, but neither did they show respect by conforming to a dress code.
I have my own differences, politically and philosophically, with Romney. But I share with him a deep respect for the norms and processes that govern our nation. They are what stands between our representative democracy and a banana republic, a point driven home repeatedly by the excesses and lapses of the previous administration.
Romney has become something of an avatar of bipartisanship in a capital where adherence to rules and guidelines often depends on the side of the political chasm to which they are being applied. Romney has stayed the constitutional course, whether it involves presidential behavior or judicial confirmations.
Earlier, it was Democrats who showed a willingness to bend process for their benefit. Many have been yammering about Attorney General Merrick Garland moving too slowly in the Justice Department’s investigation of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and former President Donald Trump’s role in that disgrace. Garland’s deliberateness has infuriated many Democrats. Rep. Elaine Luria, a Virginia Democrat on the House committee investigating the Capitol attack, said the quiet part out loud.
“The Department of Justice must move swiftly,” Luria said. “Attorney General Garland, do your job so that we can do ours.”
Curiously, Democrats are not demanding such swiftness in the separate DOJ probe into Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden. Republicans live in the parallel universe, content with the Jan. 6 snail’s pace while clamoring for swift action on Biden fils.
Indicting a former president, or a current president’s son, is serious business. Precedents can be set. Garland understands. It must be done correctly. Process must be served or justice assuredly will not.
Either case, depending on Garland’s course of action, could end up before a Supreme Court damaged before Jackson’s ascension by the politicization that arises when process is abandoned. As Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, who has no peer as a pursuer and purveyor of power, chose to contort process in refusing to entertain Garland when he was nominated by Barack Obama in 2016, and in rushing to confirm Amy Coney Barrett in 2020. Now, McConnell refuses to commit to considering another Biden nominee should an opening occur and Republicans win back the Senate in November.
Care must be taken. Against our divisions, process might be all we have left.
Columnist Michael Dobie’s opinions are his own.
Michael Dobie is a member of the Newsday editorial board.
