Press Release: 03/23/2019

Lawsuit to Defend Separation of Power and Due Process in Senate Confirmation

 

New York City: Equal Vote America Corp. (EVA) has filed a civil lawsuit against Mitch McConnell and Charles Grassley at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (CASE # 1:19-cv-02346) on the ground that their refusal to conduct any senate confirmation process for Chief Judge Garland’s nomination to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court represented a blatant breach of Separation of Power and a gross violation of Due Process.  Initial Conference set for 6/7/2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 18B, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Denise L.Cote.

On March 16, 2016 President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland, the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to fill an open seat on the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

The founding fathers in drafting the Constitution established the principle of Separation of Powers which provides “checks” and “balances” among the three branches of government, and requires separate “authorities” and “duties” to be performed by each branch. Presidential nomination with “Advice and Consent” by the Senate has been a well-established long-standing due process that reflects such principle, and requires discharge of duty by both the President and the Senate, respectively. 

However, the Republican-controlled Senate, led by Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, and Charles Grassley, then the Chairman of the Senate Judicial Committee, completely ignored the Garland nomination and refused to conduct the long-standing confirmation process that includes open hearing, committee vote and floor vote for all presidential nominations from both parties. 

By refusing to conduct confirmation process the Defendants blatantly violated the constitutional principles of (1) Separation of Power and (2) the Judicial Independence, the Executive Power Clause in Article II § 1, the Appointment Clause in Article II § 2, and the Due Process protection for the Office of Presidency, Chief Judge Garland, and for all voters who considered judicial nomination as one of the most important factors in casting their votes in the 2012 Election.  The Defendants also betrayed our founding fathers’ intention and neglected a duty that entrusted by all Americans and paid for by all taxpayers.

Therefore, the refusal of confirmation process for Chief Judge Garland’s nomination has

The redress Plaintiff is seeking is for the Court to review and declare that the Defendants’ refusal of confirmation process to a presidential nomination is unconstitutional.