This WSJ article discusses the recent absurd statements by certain senators seeking greater “control” over judicial nominees and exposes the faultiness of their logic. The role of the Senate under the Constitution is to give “advise and consent” to the President regarding judicial nominees, not to “interrogate and control” them. This article shatters the recent myth that all legal precedents must be upheld all the time. If this were the case, such cases as Dread Scott (“the black man has no rights…”) and Plessy v. Ferguson (“separate but equal”) would still be enforced. The role of a judge is to uphold the Constitution and not to slavishly follow wrongly-decided precedent.