Alabama reacts to Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee

Supreme Court
Photo Credit: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

President Barack Obama Wednesday nominated U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Merrick Garland to the U.S. Supreme Court to fill the vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia who died last month after sitting on the court for three decades.

Here’s what Alabama politicians are saying about the President’s nominee:

Senator Richard ShelbyU.S. Sen. Richard Shelby:

President Obama and I strongly disagree on which direction to take our nation, and I believe that we should do everything in our power to block him from further damaging the future of America. Rather than nominating an individual who will preserve the conservative legacy of the late Antonin Scalia, President Obama is attempting to solidify his liberal agenda by drastically changing the direction of the Court for decades to come. This critical decision should be made after the upcoming presidential election so that the American people have a voice. I am adamantly opposed to any Senate action on President Obama’s nomination of Judge Garland to the Supreme Court, and I urge my conservative colleagues to join me.

Bradley Byrne Official fraudU.S. Rep. Bradley Byrne (AL-01):

The President has the authority to nominate anyone he wants to serve on the Supreme Court; however, only with the advice and consent of the Senate may that person be appointed to the Court. As I have said before, the Senate should not confirm a new Supreme Court justice until a new president is elected. This is not about Judge Garland. This is about ensuring the American people have a chance to weigh in through the electoral process before such an impactful decision is made.

Martha Roby OfficialU.S. Rep. Martha Roby (AL-02):

As a conservative, Representative Roby believes a strict constitutionalist in the mold of the late Justice Scalia should fill this important vacancy. However, the House of Representatives plays no role in the process of filling Supreme Court vacancies.

The Constitution grants the president the authority to nominate justices to the high court, but only with the consent of the Senate. While President Obama has selected his nominee, the Senate has every authority to withhold its consent, which appears to be the case here.

Mike Rogers OfficialU.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (AL-03):

Has not responded to request for comment.


Robert Aderholt OfficialU.S. Rep. Robert Aderholt (AL-04):

Has not responded to request for comment.


Mo Brooks OfficialU.S. Rep. Mo Brooks (AL-05):

Has not responded to request for comment.


Gary Palmer OfficialU.S. Rep. Gary Palmer (AL-06):

No comment.


Terri Sewell OfficialU.S. Rep. Terri Sewell (AL-07):

In fulfillment of his constitutional duty, President Obama has nominated a qualified jurist to the United States Supreme Court. Merrick Garland is a highly qualified jurist on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and is deserving of a confirmation hearing from the Senate.   America expects the United States Senate to do its job and give the President’s nominee fair consideration and a timely vote. Our democracy demands that our leaders lead and do their jobs– the American people deserve no less.


This article will be updated as additional reactions come in.


  1. Sen. Linda Coleman-Madison (D-Fairfield) lodged the only opposition to the bill. I believe the Fairfield Objecting party is confusing separation with Degree of Separation.

    We are not living in India or Singapore, though many people from those parts of the world do live in Jefferson County.

    The degree of separation varies from total separation mandated by a constitution, as in India and Singapore, to an official religion with total prohibition of the practice of any other religion, as in the Maldives.

    Is there a Happy Medium or this another absurdity of Republicans who “Just Say No” JUST SAY NO MAS Y NUNCA MAS to Senator Richard Shelby’s 2016 Senate Bid.

    Freedom of Religion is not total separation.

Comments are closed.