Among all the major headlines today, the one with the potential for the most lasting impact and damage is that Donald Trump has narrowed down his Supreme Court nominee list down to two or three and will formally nominate someone next week. The only reason he is set to nominate anyone at all, of course, is that the Republicans in the Senate refused to even hold a vote on President Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland in an unprecedented maneuver last year. Chuck Schumer has said that Democrats will oppose “anyone outside the mainstream” but that’s not good enough, in my opinion.

I am not, however, going to argue for the same kind of total obstruction that Republicans pursued under President Obama. Constant, unthinking and endless obstruction is destructive to our democracy. And that is why it must be opposed by a targeted obstruction.

Rather than oppose EVERY Supreme Court nominee Trump might get to make, I believe we should instead make a commitment to obstruct any nominee to fill Scalia's vacant seat. If another justice were to pass away or resign during Trump’s term, we should allow his second pick to come to a vote. This accomplishes a number of things:

1. It keeps the Republicans from “getting away with it.” The Senate’s obstruction of Merrick Garland was unprecedented and without justification. They simply refused to let a two-term president elected by large popular and electoral vote margins in two separate elections from fulfilling his constitutional duty of filling the Supreme Court seat. This cannot be allowed to succeed. If it does, it invites the possibility of every Supreme Court nominee from every president to be filibustered until the end of the Republic. To pass this pick to a president who lost the popular vote is an even bigger insult.
2. It breaks the potentially Supreme Court killing cycle by keeping the penalty for Republican obstruction to what amounts to “an eye for an eye.” You blocked one nominee. We block one nominee. That seat will remain empty until the next Democratic president is allowed to fill that seat. If the GOP still won’t let that seat be filled the next time there is a Democratic president, then we remain #onejusticeodwn.
3. It shows that the Democrats are still the adults in the room. We are not opposed to allowing government to function or for legitimately elected leaders, no matter how much we dislike or disagree with them, to carry out their duties within the confines of the Constitution. We will not aid the Republicans in breaking our democracy beyond all repair.
4. For now, it makes sure the Supreme Court will remain a 4-4 tie between liberals and conservatives. This could lead to more deadlock on the Court, OR it could lead the justices to perhaps rise above partisanship and work toward decisions that a bipartisan majority can agree with. That wouldn’t be a bad thing.
5. It shows Democratic unity and strength. It shows we have backbone and that we’re willing to stick together.

I’ve already called my Democratic Senator to voice support for this plan. Will you? Can we vow to remain #onejusticedown?