It appears that a significant portion of the Democrats in Congress want Hillary Clinton to appoint aged conservatives to the courts.
This appears simply to be an exercise in rank cowardice:
Senate Democrats say Hillary Clinton should ignore pressure from liberals who want her to make a younger, more progressive pick for the Supreme Court than Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee.
Democrats facing tough races in the next cycle don’t want Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, to spend her political capital on a messy fight over the court — and the hot-button social issues under its jurisdiction — during her first 100 days in office.
They also don’t want to have to defend a more liberal pick ahead of a tough reelection cycle in 2018.
Democrats will be defending 25 seats, compared to just eight for Republicans that year, including in states such as North Dakota, Montana, West Virginia and Missouri. All are tough places for the party to win in presidential, let alone midterm, elections.
The Democrats would prefer that Clinton, if she is elected, focus her time and attention on passing legislation they can run on as a major accomplishment, such as an infrastructure investment package.
A senior Senate Democratic aide whose boss faces a competitive reelection in 2018 said, “Not one of those vulnerable Democrats is going to run on the Supreme Court; they can run on an infrastructure bill.”
This is the sort of crap that leads makes voting 3rd party or staying home a lot more attractive.
They want the next Supreme Court justice to be a guy who would be the oldest justice appointed in 44 years, and someone who is to the right of Scalia on criminal due process.
F%$# these guys.