Logical flaws in ‘speedy consideration’

In a Sept. 29 letter to the editor, the writer calls for “speedy consideration” of a Supreme Court nominee to succeed Ruth Bader Ginsburg. His logic has some serious flaws.

First, he brings up the number of days several justices’ confirmation took. The length of time it takes to confirm a justice has nothing whatsoever to do with the hypocritical flipflop Senate Republicans have made since 2016, when (with five times the inter val before the election), they would not even meet with Merrick Garland.

I do not know if the writer thinks we will not notice that his argument has nothing to do with the current situation, or if he simply does not understand the disconnect.

He goes on to say “The United States of America cannot afford to have an eight-member Supreme Court that could deadlock on critical questions coming from dangerous liberal socialist Democrats.” The United States of America has had an eight-member Supreme Court for a period of time, ever y time a justice has died or resigned; why is this time different? What is he afraid of? That there would not be enough justices to hand Donald Trump an election he is going to lose in a landslide? Sorry, but the voters decide who is in the Oval Office. That’s how it works in a constitutional democracy.

Polls show that at least a plurality (57 percent) of Americans want the next president to nominate the next Supreme Court justice. Gaming the system should not make it a fait accompli, and supporting the unethical action of the current administration by faulty logic simply shows how far some people are willing to go to subvert democracy in this nation.