To minimise the risk of unexpected drama, US Presidents – and candidates to be President – have to make their health records public. Not so Supreme Court justices. Friends who said that Justice Antonin Scalia was in fine health when he died this month were not exactly right.
The litany of ailments afflicting Mr Scalia, whose death at 79 has set off an incendiary row over whether President Barack Obama has the right to name his successor, was described in a letter from the court’s doctor, Rear Admiral Brian Monahan, to the authorities in Texas where it happened.
They included high blood pressure, obesity, chronic heart disease, pulmonary disease and sleep apnoea. He was also a smoker. He had a rotary cuff injury that could not be operated on because he was too week. But in the 30 years he served, only once did Mr Scalia issue a press release pertaining to his health, a level of coyness unmatched by any of his colleagues.
Meanwhile the confrontation over the process of replacing him continued to intensify after Republican leaders in the US Senate announced flatly that if Mr Obama insists on nominating someone to replace Mr Scalia, arguably the most influential conservative force the Court has ever seen, they will use their position as the majority party to make sure that person isn’t even given the courtesy of hearings.
The message was clear: nominate whomever you like, we will not even pay attention until you have left office at the start of next year when – they hope – they will have a Republican president again. Now, Mr Obama has declared that he will indeed be putting a name forward.
“As senators prepare to fulfil their constitutional responsibility to consider the person I appoint, I hope they’ll move quickly to debate and then confirm this nominee so that the court can continue to serve the American people at full strength,” he wrote in a blog. “He or she will have an independent mind, rigorous intellect, impeccable credentials and a record of excellence and integrity.”
