With the recent passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, there has been a lot of controversy surrounding her seat on the Supreme Court and who should choose who gets to fill her seat. Current President Donald J. Trump should be the one to nominate the new Supreme Court Justice.

It is in his presidential duties to “nominate someone for a vacancy on the Court” as detailed on the Supreme Court Government website. Many people think the newly elected president should be the one that nominates a new justice, but that is 4 months away and Trump should not stop doing his presidential duties 4 months before his term ends.

“I believe the current President of the United States should nominate a justice of the Supreme Court, which is currently Donald J. Trump,” owner of Miomi Productions Heather Maas said.

In the Constitution, Article II / Section 2 / Paragraph 2 states: “He [The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate… and he shall nominate… and shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for.”

The Constitution states that the current President will nominate the justice in the case of an absence. The nominee then is voted on by the Senate to ensure both branches are in agreement on who is given that power. For the nominee to be elected, there must be a “simple majority” vote by the Senate.

“Although both are monumentally important, I would have to say the Supreme Court Justice is more important at this time… considering the volatility of this year’s Presidential election and possible delay and/or challenges facing this election, who exactly wins the Presidential election could be delayed or too close to call. It is critical the Supreme Court have a full 9 members if the court is called upon to rule on the winning candidate,” Maas said.

If Americans decide to wait for the newly elected president to nominate the new justice and the Supreme Court votes on the president, there could be a tie and the election would be further delayed.

“The cons would be that the nomination process would not necessarily be followed as it is stated in the constitution. Timing is everything with Supreme Court nominations. A president needs the opportunity of a vacancy to fill and the benefit of enough support in the senate to back their nominee,” government teacher Ryan Miller said.

“Both gender and ethnicity are important if the Supreme Court is to reflect a true America. Of course, being female, I support adding more women! But when it comes right down to it all we can hope is that they are good and fair men and women who will uphold the constitution and not be swayed by political dogma,” local business owner Loann Stokes said.

If the current president nominates somebody who does their jobs as the constitution states, it should not matter whether or not someone supports the current president.

There are some people that firmly believe they should wait for the newly elected president to nominate the next justice. Since, in 2016, there was a vacancy on the supreme court and the Senate Judiciary Committee decided to wait for the newly elected president to nominate a justice, which was against the Constitution and should not have happened. However, because there has been an issue like this before, Americans should not go against the constitution again. In order to follow what the Constitution clearly laid out, the current president should nominate a new justice.

Since the Constitution states that the current president is the one to nominate in the case of an absence, Trump should be able to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice since he is the current President of the United States.