Elizabeth Warren continues to leave a mark on the left side of American politics, even after she declined to run for president.
As reported by the Huffington Post, Warren attacked Senate Republicans for vowing to stop anyone whom President Barack Obama might put forward to replace the late Antonin Scalia.
"Their response to one of the most solemn and consequential tasks that our government performs, the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice, will be to pretend that that nominee and President Obama himself simply do not exist."Warren further claimed that Republicans have "bowed to extremists" who wish to "cripple his administration and to paralyze the federal courts." Her comments are part of a collective effort with fellow Democrats to counter Republicans who say that there is no constitutional mandate for them to accept a nominee during an election year.
How do Republicans respond to Warren?
Republicans responded to Warren and other Democrats by pointing out that top Democrats took the very same stance in the past, when the shoe was on the other foot.
For instance, when President George H.W. Bush was running for re-election in 1992, then-Senator (and now U.S. vice president) Joe Biden declared,
"It is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed."Republican Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley of Iowa countered Warren and her colleagues.
"It's up to the Senate to decide how we do our job with regard to 'advise and consent.'"
Ironically, Warren herself has been the speculation regarding the vacant seat on the high court. CNN recently speculated on the prospects of her getting nominated.
"Warren would fit within the President's definitions. She spent nearly 20 years as a law professor at Harvard."However, the CNN report added that such an appointment would be unlikely: should Warren be appointed and confirmed, the Republican governor of Massachusetts would then choose Warren's successor to fill out the remainder of her term.
Warren remains active
The fact that Elizabeth Warren was injected into the debate over the Supreme Court indicates that her popularity within her party has not waned since she was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 2010.
Last August, leading liberal groups were trying to get Warren to change her mind about not running for president.
For instance, Chris Shelton, president of Communications Workers for America, told The Hill that he would be "real interested" if Warren changed her mind.
Even more recently, the controversial Reverend Al Sharpton declared that a Warren candidacy for president would be "electrifying."
Sharpton contrasted his excitement for Warren with his lack of enthusiasm for the current frontrunner, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
"I think the weaknesses of Mrs. Clinton have been she has not been able to resonate that economic message as well as [Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders]. And she has not been as clear on the Wall Street greed."Both Clinton and Sanders have invoked Warren in recent weeks. At a recent debate, Clinton was asked if she agreed "with Elizabeth Warren's criticism that both your husband's administration and President Obama's have relied too heavily on advisers who represent the world view of the big banks."
She responded that she would reach out to many for advice on financial matters, "including to Sen. Warren."
In January, Sanders would not rule out naming Elizabeth Warren as his running mate.
Warren has not yet declared which candidate she will endorse.
[Photo by Jacquelyn Martin/AP Images]