Where Would Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee Merrick Garland Stand on Labor Issues?

[marmar]

(In These Times) Despite hardline Senate Republican opposition to meeting with, let alone voting on, any potential replacement for recently deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, on Tuesday, President Obama nominated Chief Judge Merrick Garland of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., to fill the vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia after his recent, unexpected death.

Garland is a highly qualified, well-respected judge, first appointed in 1997 by President Bill Clinton to the D.C. Circuit Court and confirmed by a vote of 76 to 23 in the Senate. Garland has been under consideration for a seat on the Supreme Court previously; he has a reputation for judicial restraint (quite unlike Scalia’s highly ideological attempt to use the Supreme Court to re-write the nation’s law).

It’s hard to give him a clear political label, but Garland does not seem to be as progressive on workers’ rights issues as Scalia was reactionary. In 2010 Tom Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog, wrote that Garland was “essentially the model, neutral judge. He is acknowledged by all to be brilliant. His opinions avoid unnecessary, sweeping pronouncements.” On criminal law (and cases involving Guantanamo detainees), Goldstein wrote, Garland leaned a bit conservative, on first amendment, environmental and “open government” issues, a bit liberal. One consistent thread seems to be deference towards regulatory agencies, letting them make decisions without the Supreme Court always second-guessing or rewriting the law.

That sentiment may be important for labor issues before the Supreme Court, which has frequently acted to restrain the National Labor Relations Board and crimp worker rights in decades past. Scalia’s vote was crucial in the many 5-4 decisions by the Supreme Court that weakened rights and protections for American workers. His death, for example, seemed to have eliminated (for the moment) a likely 5-4 court decision in the Friedrichs case, which would have prevented public employee unions from charging non-members of the union a fee that paid for the benefits of union bargaining and grievance representation that union by law must provide. ..................(more)

http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/18984/merrick-garland-labor-scotus-nominee-obama-republicans

[tularetom]

1. It doesn't matter, the important thing is that Obama wins the umpteen dimension chess match

with McConnell. Who cares if the justice he would appoint is a moderate republican, unfriendly toward labor and defendants rights?

Obama wins all these battles in the court of public opinion, yet the public is still getting crapped on. And if McConnell is able to delay action on Garland, and Hillary Clinton becomes POTUS, he wins, because her nominee is likely to be even more corporate friendly than Garland.

[pampango]

2. From the AFL-CIO:

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka released the following statement in response to President Barack Obama's nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the U.S. Supreme Court:

Chief Judge Merrick Garland of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit brings impeccable credentials and deep experience to this nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Garland’s career shows a deep commitment to public service and to the rule of law. These qualities are why he was confirmed to the D.C. Circuit 18 years ago by a bipartisan majority and with the strong support of then-Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch. Judge Garland is a superbly qualified nominee who deserves prompt consideration and confirmation by the U.S. Senate. Working people deserve and expect no less.

http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Senate-Should-Schedule-Hearing-and-Vote-on-Supreme-Court-Nominee-Merrick-Garland

[valerief]

3. What does highly qualified, well-respected mean? That the corporatists/neoliberals/fascists

like him?

Also, has anyone here ever met anyone whose first name was Merrick?