Of course Republicans should nominate anti-abortion judges
Hillary Clinton said in 2016 that she would have a litmus test for all Supreme Court nominees, if she became President: They must support legalized abortion. The rules have changed, so why are Republicans determined to play by the old rules?
In the past, it was considered inappropriate for SCOTUS nominees to even address questions that might come up before the court. The argument, from both sides, was that nominations should be decided on the nominee's qualifications rather than judicial philosophy. Of course, this was always nonsense. Republicans would generally nominate anti-abortion judges, and Democrats would nominate judges that supported legal abortion.
Republicans are sticking to the old playbook of trying to be "neutral" on abortion with their nominees. Why? Democrats do not abide by the old rules, so Republicans should not do that either. Now, to be clear: This is not a case of throwing out our principles to "fight fire with fire." I hate that mentality and it is destroying the conservative movement. It is not enough to be an "anti-Leftist." We must embrace conservative principles in order to truly "win." That is what I am advocating. This is about doing the right thing. Nominating anti-abortion justices has always been the right thing to do.
But now that the Democrats have openly embraced litmus tests, there is no longer any reason to hold to the old "no litmus test" pretense any more. Nominate anti-abortion judges and justices and do it openly. No more hiding. Everyone already knows what is really going on with abortion rights every time a Supreme Court justice is nominated. It would be refreshing to see politicians from both parties just be honest and open about their agendas. That is the best way to "drain the swamp."