Conor Friedersdorf at the Atlantic on the senators who are vowing to refuse to do their job:

Is it legitimate for the Republican-controlled Senate to refrain from confirming a replacement for the late Supreme Court justice until a new president is elected, as Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson and others on the right have urged? Or does the Senate have an obligation to approve a qualified nominee put forth by President Obama, as many on the left argued as soon as news of the death broke?

No, and yes.

He quotes Ted Cruz tweeting a ridiculous claim:

Justice Scalia was an American hero. We owe it to him, & the Nation, for the Senate to ensure that the

From the US Senate Judiciary Committee:

When a vacancy occurs on the Supreme Court, the President of the United States is given the authority, under Article II of the United States Constitution, to nominate a person to fill the vacancy.  The nomination is referred to the United States Senate, where the Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing where the nominee provides testimony and responds to questions from members of the panel.  Traditionally, the Committee refers the nomination to the full Senate for consideration.

I don’t see anything there stipulating exceptions for a boycott or a sitdown strike or a refusal or a right to take a year-long vacation first. I don’t see any “unless the Committee or the Senate … Read the rest