Here is a statement from Senator Toomey, which I have adapted to fit the current situation.
“With the U.S. Supreme Court’s balance at stake, and with the presidential election [under investigation], it is wise to [ensure] the American people [were given] a more direct voice in the selection and confirmation of the next justice. Should [Neil Gorsuch] be [brought up for a vote before the resolution of these investigations, Senator Toomey should] be happy to [refuse] his nomination, as [he did] with [Merrick Garland, when he was] submitted by President Obama.”
I was on Senator Toomey’s telephone town hall yesterday afternoon, but it ended so quickly that the Senator wasn’t able to get to my question about the Supreme Court nomination.
Senator Toomey said last year, on refusing to hold a hearing for Merrick Garland, that he wished “to give the American people a more direct say in this critical decision.” American Intelligence agencies have stated that Russia interfered with the election. We’ve seen an increasing number of reports of the Republican administration’s, and the Republican campaign’s, connection with Russian government and intelligence. There are several ongoing investigations into these connections, and there are more proposed and requested. We don’t have all the facts. We don’t know to what extent the outcome of the election was the say of the American people or the Russian government. With this in mind, does Senator Toomey intend to break his pledge to withhold a Supreme Court hearing until we know we’ve been listening to the American people, rather than the Russian government?
All signs point to “Yes!”
The Senate must NOT confirm any permanent appointments while the election is under official investigation. The Senate is still investigating Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election, so any hearings on appointments to the Supreme Court must be delayed until the conclusion of those investigations. You don’t have all the information, so you must not make permanent decisions.