The two top Republicans in the Senate Majority Leader's position, if they take over the Senate in the upcoming election, have talked about how they will thwart Kamala Harris' agenda, including potential Supreme Court nominees.
Senator John Thune of South Dakota told CNN's Manu Raju that if Kamala Harris wins the presidency and Republicans win the Senate, there is no abortion bill that will get sixty votes in the Senate, and when asked if he could see that is allowed by any Harris Supreme. Should the court nominee be confirmed, Thune said it would depend on who he is.
Sen. John Cornyn of Texas separately told Raju that he “would not plan to vote for any radical radical candidate that I know he would want to run.”
Watch.
NEW. “I'm not going to call a vote on some radical radical candidate that I know he would like to run.” @mkraju:'s new report on how @SenJohnThune and: @JohnCornyn: could create obstacles for a potential President Harris. https://t.co/5RHjVGkE12 #Inside politics pic.twitter.com/nIAPOb9IbR
— Inside Politics (@InsidePolitics) September 29, 2024
Raju asked. Would you have a national abortion ban for Majority Leader?
Thune replied that there is no abortion proposal that will get 60 votes. I don't think there is any abortion proposition that will get sixty votes on the United States floor.
Raju: Can you afford a Supreme Court nominee for Harris?
Tune: Well, I mean, obviously, it probably depends on who it is, and that's the advantage of having a Republican Senate.
Thune said he would not change the filibuster on any issue.
Another potential majority leader, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, also said he didn't think the abortion ban would get 60 votes and that he would absolutely uphold the filibuster.
When Raju asked him if he would allow Harris to be confirmed as a Supreme Court nominee, Senator Cornyn said, A wild-eyed radical candidate that I know he would love to run.”
Harris is a former prosecutor and attorney general who has been endorsed by many former Republican officials and former Trump. administration officials, so the idea that he would nominate a “wild-eyed radical” to the Supreme Court is ludicrous. Cornyn's comment can best be interpreted as the speech of regular voters, as he would not vote for someone who would defend basic individual liberties like abortion health care. It is strange that the Republican leadership considers a basic freedom radical, but takes away long-established freedoms as conservative (this is not traditional conservatism).
Thune is whipping up a storm to promote Republican Senate candidates.
Republicans have spent since 2009 obstructing a Democratic president from driving the country over the fiscal cliff and shutting down the government when they didn't get the pieces of their radical agenda.
In the Senate, they used that power to reject then-President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland, who was respected by both sides of the aisle. Garland would make the perfect Supreme Court judge. he has a moderate temperament for it and is committed to the rule of law and precedent, unlike the three justices that Donald Trump has put on the court and, of course, a stark contrast to the rampant corruption of conservative Justice Clarence Thomas.
So in that context, the way Cornyn and Thune responded to the abortion ban was to expand it to talk about any means of abortion, a way to avoid being held accountable by their base for not accepting the abortion ban. at the same time, there is room to suggest that there will also be no way abortion protections will be created if Republicans win the Senate.
Most Americans want Roe's protection restored. Women are dying because of Republican abortion bans, and others are losing their fertility and going through unnecessary fear and pain that is akin to medical torture. Republicans are committed to continuing to allow women and girls to die under their rule if they win the Senate. It is worth pausing here to ask ourselves how they define “pro-life” and why that definition does not include the lives of women and girls.
Republicans vow to continue abusing their power to thwart the will of the people, an attack on the foundations of freedom and democracy on which our country depends. They have become a radicalized party, with common sense Republicans marginalized and extreme voices strengthened, which is the direct opposite of the Democratic Party today.
Sarah received President Barack Obama and then Vice President Joe Biden in 2016. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton also repeatedly interviewed Speaker Nancy Pelosi and exclusively covered her first House appearance since then-President Donald Trump's first impeachment.
Sarah is a two-time award-winning video producer for Telly and a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.
Connect with Sarah by email, Mastodon @PoliticusSarah@Journa.Host and Twitter:
Leave a Comment