***The Iowa Standard is an independent media voice. We rely on the financial support of our readers to exist. Please consider a one-time sign of support or becoming a monthly supporter at $5, $10/month - whatever you think we're worth! If you’ve ever used the phrase “Fake News” — now YOU can actually DO something about it! You can also support us on PayPal at [email protected] or Venmo at Iowa-Standard-2018 or through the mail at: PO Box 112 Sioux Center, IA 51250

Amidst all the cries of hypocrisy, what’s being lost in the debate surrounding the pending Supreme Court appointment to fill the former seat held by Ruth Bader Ginsburg is simple history and precedent.

President Donald J. Trump has both history and precedent on his side. A united government has historically displayed an ability to confirm a Supreme Court justice regardless of timing.


Throughout history, choosing not to fill a vacancy has never happened. Ever. Once.

The Washington Post reported that “there’s nothing in the Constitution that prevents a Supreme Court vacancy from being filled, regardless of how close to an election it opens up.”

Democrats, however, are threatening unprecedented action to stop a completely constitutional process from playing out.

Here is the lesson for Democrats — elections have consequences.

If the Democrats wanted to have a say in the Supreme Court, they should’ve won the presidency in 2016 or the U.S. Senate in 2018.

They did not.

Republicans did.

Now Democrats have to watch as Republicans govern.

Winners make policy.

If Democrats want to make policy — in this case have a serious voice in appointing Supreme Court Justice — maybe they should be a little less extreme and a little more appealing to the average American.


Author: Jacob Hall


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here