Garland nomination fight centers around disrespect for Obama, not the judge

President Obama with Judge Merrick B. Garland before announcing his nomination to the Supreme Court at the White House, March 16, 2016. (Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

How do you get the Democratic base fired up about nominating a moderate white man in his 60s to the Supreme Court?

The progressive groups leading the charge in support of Merrick Garland’s nomination think they’ve found the answer. In social media blasts and in-person calls to action around the country, they are casting Republicans’ near-unanimous refusal to consider President Obama’s nominee as part of a history of disrespect and disdain shown to the president — a disrespect that is racially motivated.

“I talk to black audiences, and I say, look, this is part of a larger pattern of disrespect,” said Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, which is part of the push to get Garland a hearing. “It goes back to when Speaker [Mitch] McConnell says we’re going to make him a one-term president. You have someone like Rep. Joe Wilson [R-S.C.] saying, ‘You lie.’ You have [former Arizona Gov.] Jan Brewer shaking her finger in his face. These are signs of disrespect that would have never been justified with another president. Race is a factor.”

After Antonin Scalia died last month, civil rights groups and members of the Congressional Black Caucus urged the president to nominate a black woman to the court — a historic pick that would have rallied women of color to the cause. When the president took another, less barrier-breaking route, it was unclear whether the left would be as enthusiastic about fighting the inevitable Republican opposition to his choice.

The Democrats vying to replace Obama have seemed lukewarm about his pick. Sen. Bernie Sanders has said he would rather choose his own justice if elected, noting that there are “more progressive judges out there.” Hillary Clinton, whose campaign has been buoyed by support from women of color, dodged a question on Monday about whether she’d keep Garland as her nominee if she were elected and his nomination was still pending. (Asked if he was a good choice, she said he has a “tremendous reputation.”)

But one way to motivate the Democratic base is to point out that Republicans are disrespecting the president — who remains incredibly popular with Democrats — by refusing to even consider his pick. The progressive groups have coalesced around the message “Do your job,” and they emphasize that if Republicans refuse to bring up the nomination, it will be the first time a Supreme Court nominee has ever not been given a vote.

Henderson tells audiences: “He’s the 44th president, not three-fifths of a president.”

“Our members care about Obama as a president and his presidency a great deal,” said Jo Comerford, a campaign director for the progressive grassroots organization MoveOn. “We’ve used the ‘disrespect’ language in our communications to our members because of their loyalty.” Comerford said the GOP opposition to the president is seen by many MoveOn members as an attempt “to undermine his authority and his presidency.”

“It is flagrantly disrespectful, and it is new in the sense that we’ve never seen this kind of rank knee-jerk obstruction to a nominee,” said Stephen Spaulding, legal director of the nonpartisan Common Cause, a nonprofit that promotes accountable government and is also part of the coalition.

MoveOn and the other groups fighting for Garland’s hearing flew airplanes trailing “Do Your Job” banners over several senators’ hometowns as they returned for a two-week recess earlier this week. They plan on meeting senators with demonstrations when they return to the Capitol, as well.

It’s unclear if all the pressure will work. So far, Repubican Sens. Mark Kirk of Illinois, Susan Collins of Maine and Jerry Moran of Kansas have broken with party leadership and said they believe Garland should be granted a hearing. Several other Republican senators, including Pat Toomey of Pennsylania and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, have said they would meet with Garland as a courtesy but that they don’t believe the Senate should even consider him.

The right is, if anything, more fired up than the left. The National Rifle Association, in particular, is lobbying hard against giving Garland a vote. And as the Washington Post pointed out Thursday, only two people showed up to one of the planned protests against Republican Sen. Ron Johnson in Wisconsin. Inside the event, Johnson offered a personal “guarantee” to his supporters that he would not allow Garland to be elected, eliciting the loudest cheers of the night.

“A lot of people say, ‘Do your job.’ You know what? I’m doing my job!” Johnson said. “We need somebody that can replace Scalia.”