Judge Merrick Garland, left, meets on April 5 with Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) on Capitol Hill. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
Senate Democrats have presented a united front when it comes to advancing the confirmation process for Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland. But should Garland eventually receive an up-or-down vote, that Democratic unity may not endure.
Garland met Tuesday with Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), who has frequently broken with his party over matters of environmental regulation and gun rights — two issues on which the Supreme Court has significant influence through its constitutional interpretations. Manchin, in an interview Wednesday, praised Garland but said he still has reservations after their hour-long meeting.
“I have concerns,” he said. “But you know what? He was very straightforward and forthright, and we just have to see. That’s why I would like the committee hearing to proceed. It would really let me know a lot more.”
[Senate Democrats slam Republican blockade as Garland visits Capitol Hill]
Other Democrats who have met with Garland, such as Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota, have also withheld judgment on whether he should ultimately be confirmed, citing the need for the process to play out. But red-state Democrats such as Manchin would have especially precarious decisions to make.
Manchin, a supporter of gun rights, said he asked Garland about two cases he was involved in as a U.S. Circuit Court judge — one in which he sided with the federal government over the National Rifle Association in a dispute about the retention of background-check records and another in which he voted for additional review of a decision that overturned the long-standing handgun ban in Washington, D.C.
He said Garland sought to make clear that he has some personal experience with firearms. “He does shoot, and he has taken his daughters on vacation and they’ve gone to ranges, so he’s not unfamiliar with guns, and he’s not anti — that’s what he’s explaining to me,” Manchin said. “And that will all come on in a hearing.”
But Manchin said his mind was not completely eased: “You’re concerned about it, because there are some things [to be concerned about]. We haven’t found anything explicit where it says he did this, okay? My assumption in looking at it is that he tries to walk very closely the constitutional line of saying, if it’s spelled out, that’s what we’re going to do. If it’s not spelled out, leaving for finding or ruling or interpretation, then I don’t have enough information to know — is he going to lean left, lean right or stay right down the middle?”
[Senate Democrats propose April hearings, May votes on Garland confirmation]
Manchin is under special pressure on environmental issues. Many politicians, including Manchin, blame government regulations for playing a major role in the collapse of the West Virginia coal industry, and he has opposed President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, a set of Environmental Protection Agency rules that would limit the carbon dioxide emissions of large coal-fueled power plants.
Days before Justice Antonin Scalia died in February, a closely divided Supreme Court voted to put a hold on the implementation of the plan while it is challenged in federal court. The 5-to-4 vote in favor of the hold suggests that Scalia’s successor would play a crucial role in the outcome of the case.
“I let him know how I felt, that I was very pleased that Scalia at least took into consideration that there should be a halt, since they don’t have technology in place and things of this sort,” Manchin said. “And he basically went back into the interpretation of the law . . . so that gave me some concern.”
As both a sitting judge on the appeals court that has jurisdiction over the Clean Power Plan challenge and a potential Supreme Court justice, Garland is barred from discussing his specific views on the case. But there are other tea leaves for Manchin to read, including analyses that show Garland tending to support the authority of federal agencies in his decisions.
Manchin can also see the political pressure he is under. The conservative Judicial Crisis Network targeted Manchin as part of a multimillion-dollar ad campaign warning him not to back “a justice that will weaken the right to bear arms, hurt the coal industry and trample the Constitution.”
Manchin could not say whether his long meeting with Garland made him more or less likely to support his confirmation: “I’m not leaning,” he said. “I wasn’t swayed to where it threw me over the top and [I’m saying] ‘Yeah, yeah, yeah, let’s go.’ ”
But he remains in lock step with Democrats on this point: Garland should get a hearing. And he compared the handling of Garland’s nomination to the recent confirmation of Robert Califf as Food and Drug Administration director — a nominee that Manchin deeply opposed.
“I was totally opposed all the way through, but it went through the process, and I respect that,” he said. “I can’t understand why I can’t get the same type of a look-see at a guy going through this detailed process.”
