The irony in debate over Scalia replacement

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Scalia was known as looking at the original intention of the Founding Fathers in interpreting the Constitution. Judges should not be political, he would argue. What would he say abut Republican arguments that the decision to replace him should be deferred until after the next president is sworn in?

Would he suggest that the current president has the obligation to nominate a candidate - and the Senate an obligation to vote on that candidate - under the Constitution?

Would the Republicans feel the same way about deferring a nomination if the current president were a Republican?

Justice Scalia has had the last laugh as his death has prompted a discussion about how political the U.S. Supreme Court really is.

Chester Kulis

Mount Prospect