CLAY COUNTY – Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died last week and the question on everyone’s mind is not necessarily who will replace the seat, but who should make that choice.

It’s an easy choice according to the U.S. Constitution, but selecting a new justice is anything but just a choice. It’s very much political and because whoever is selected holds that seat for life. It’s a very divisive decision, made even more so divisive because the current eight justices are split down the line: four that lean more liberally and four that lean more conservatively.

Considering this is a choice of politics in America, you have likely already heard of the dilemma at hand, or, you can at least guess. Republicans, including Pres. Donald Trump, want to select a new justice as soon as possible. Trump may be in the White House next January depending on the results of November’s election, so for the GOP, it’s important to get a candidate that’s likely conservative-leaning.

Democrats believe the decision shouldn’t be made until after the results of the November election, however. This has obviously caused a point of contention between not only the political figures within each side of the argument, but between Americans with differing beliefs as well. Much like the elected officials they’ve put into office, some Americans believe the decision shouldn’t be made until after the election and some believe the decision should be made now.

We asked Clay County residents what they think for this week’s Facebook Question of the Week and the majority of our readers believe the decision should be made now.

“The Constitution is the supreme law of the land,” Clay County resident Margaret Panik said. “We do what it directs us to do. If we don’t like it, we change it. There are no provisions that say, ‘You don’t get to pick if your term is ending in xx days.’ If Congress had an issue with this, they should have fixed it. They had four years to do so, but again, did nothing.”

Panik is right, but Democrats view this as a matter of courtesy considering Joe Biden could win next month’s election. Republicans are against the Democrats’ idea of postponing the decision until after the election but Democrats have rallied behind what Republicans did in 2016: blocked a justice nominee Merrick Garland of then-President Barack Obama following the death of justice Antonin Scalia.

A vacancy selection on the Supreme Court the same year as an election had not been approved by the Senate once for nearly 130 years. That was Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s justification for the Senate block in 2016.

“Remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was a divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago,” McConnell said.

McConnell said a new justice probably will be approved before the election, but certainly before the inauguration.

Despite McConnell’s reasoning in 2016 and Democratic reasoning in 2020, is there’s no law that prevents the Senate from approving a justice in the same year as an election. It was more of a guideline in prior years.

Dennis Lewis poked at McConnell and said “if only [he] had been so gung-ho” about selecting a nominee in 2016. Randall Leonard also poked at the common use of “it’s constitutional” and mentioned a lot of generally Republican-opposed things are “constitutional” like expanding courts, doing away with the filibuster.

Where do you fall on this hot topic? Let us know on our post about this subject on the official Clay Today Newspaper Facebook page and drop a like so you don’t miss out on this week’s new question.