People forget that the Republican position 7 years ago was to practice nullification of DC Circuit positions with a policy of filibustering whoever Obama nominated.

This led directly to the nuclear option, which many Rs wanted to detonate in 2005 after D filibusters. https://twitter.com/billscher/status/1315275100325896192

Many Obama noms were then clogged ahead of 2016 election including Merrick Garland.

Nuclear option in turn helped grease skids for McConnell to go nuclear for Supreme Court.

There were some Republicans and other folks who were talking up blocking all of Hillary Clinton’s nominees if she won.

Norms on court fights have been eroding for generations.

Is indefinite court-blocking more radical than court-packing? Both are allowed under the Constitution. One requires a new law and therefore is harder to accomplish.

The only thing stopping this is norms.

A norm is presumably what Lindsey Graham was trying to establish when he declared he wouldn’t confirm a Trump SCOTUS pick before the election. But process has a way of falling away if the prize is big enough.

Senate Republicans accused Obama of wanting to “pack” the D.C. Circuit by ... nominating judges for open positions. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/dont-let-democrats-pack-dc-circuit-senator-john-cornyn/

In 2005, Republican leaders called their plan to deploy the nuclear option the "Constitutional Option."

How's that for branding?

The Gang of 14 stepped in and cut a deal allowing some but not all of Bush's picks to go through.

Only *2* members of that bipartisan gang remain in the Senate:

Susan Collins
Lindsey Graham

Both facing tough reelection fights Nov. 3.