Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Sunday condemned President Donald Trump’s decision to nominate a new Supreme Court justice before the November election.
“Our institutions are being basically undermined by the lust for power, power for personal gain in the case of the president or power for institutional gain in the case of [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell at the cost of ensuring that our institutions withstand whatever the political winds might be,” Clinton told NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”
Ginsburg passed away Friday at the age of 87. (RELATED: Lindsey Graham Backs Trump’s Push To Fill Ginsburg Seat)
Clinton suggested the Republican position in 2016 to not hold Senate hearings when former President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland means they have established a precedent and now the judicial confirmation “is absolutely broken,” adding that the Republicans are trying to “defend the indefensible.”
“The system has been broken for quite a while,” Clinton continued, “but clearly the decision that Mitch McConnell made back in 2016 in the midst of that presidential election, but at a much earlier time when Justice [Antonin] Scalia unexpectedly passed away is what should be the standard now.”
Republicans are arguing that the situation today is different than it was in 2016, when the Democrats controlled the presidency and the GOP controlled the Senate.
“I think we are at a very dangerous point in American history,” Clinton contended, claiming that there has “been a concerted effort” for decades to turn back the clock on decisions made by the Supreme Court that have “opened doors to people otherwise left out.”
Clinton said these efforts “led by groups like the Federalist Society and others” have even been trying to restore segregation. (RELATED: Schumer, Waters Warn Republicans Not To Try To Fill Ginsburg’s Seat Before Election)
Clinton suggested that testimony from nominees appointed as judges to district and circuit courts “was shocking.”
“Not only did an unfortunate number of them have absolutely no experience that would qualify them for the federal bench, but a number of them would not even say they agreed with Brown v. Board of Education,” she said in reference to the Supreme Court decision that overturned segregation in schools.