Provider of professional services in the energy sector. Focused on client success through development of innovative strategies to improve organizational performance, optimize asset value and enhance business growth. Deliver solutions to move the organization to operational excellence through application of proven tools and techniques, with implementation tailored to the unique needs and culture of the client organization.
Takes issue with columnist’s take on Scalia
John Boyle observes in his recent column that discussions following the recent death of Justice Scalia have often included rhetoric laden with ignorance and incivility. Apparently, this now extends to Mr. Boyle, who took the opportunity in his column to mischaracterize the Constitution and disparage the late Justice Scalia.
Mr. Boyle says the Constitution calls for the Senate to vote. In fact, the Constitution contains no such words. The Constitution states: “he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court.” There is no requirement for a Senate vote. In fact, the framers of the Constitution considered an alternative to “advice and consent,” which would have required the Senate to vote to veto a presidential nomination. Had they intended to force the Senate to vote, they would’ve chosen this option.
Mr. Boyle also takes an unfair shot at Scalia when Boyle opines he “steadfastly contended that the Constitution should never change.” In fact Scalia recognized the Constitution contains a mechanism for change, a power which the framers chose not to vest in a nine-member unelected court. You may not agree with Scalia’s opinions, but John, you’re better than that.
William McCollum, Swannanoa