Like crazed mathematicians, people and pundits have been puzzling over whether the Republican-led Senate can get a potential associate justice voted in before the political winds change. With a 53-seat majority, the GOP has been sweating bullets that certain members may not fully back the swift nomination process. One such worry has been over former presidential candidate and Utah Senator Mitt Romney. But no more.
"I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president's nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications."This by no means signals that he will cast his vote in favor of President Donald Trump's soon-to-be-announced pick, but it signifies that, absent any great scandals or issues with jurisprudence, a smart choice by the president will be confirmed by the Senate. Romney continued:
"[The] historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party's nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own."

The Hold-Outs
The senators who have so far refused to accept the possibility of voting are Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Both have indicated that they don't believe a vacancy this close to an election should be acted upon. Whether they will be won over by the eventual candidate and change their tune remains to be seen. Other notables in the "undecided" camp, Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Colorado's Cory Gardner, are now off the fence and willing to support a vote. Monday night (Sept. 21), Gardner said:"When a President exercises constitutional authority to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate must decide how to best fulfill its constitutional duty of advice and consent. I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm."




.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)





