Most Equal Comrade's SCOTUS pick Garland looks middle-of-the-road but is in fact quite problematic

Of course, the main reason why the Senate should just sit tight and do nothing is because of the argument Ted Cruz is putting forth: in an election year, the people should be in on the decision. There's ample precedent for that. Just ask Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer. 

But there are also reasons having to do with this particular nominee.

He's bad on the environment and guns:

Garland’s record as a Clinton-appointed member of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals since 1997, and as its chief judge since 2013, offers no reason to believe that his addition to the Court would provide anything other than a reliable fifth vote to the Court’s liberal bloc. In 2002, dissenting from a ruling striking down the Environmental Protection Agency’s “Haze Rule,” he sought to expand the agency’s power under the already sweeping Clean Air Act. In 2007, when a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel let stand a ruling striking down Washington D.C.’s restrictive handgun law (a decision the Supreme Court upheld in D.C. v. Heller), Garland voted to grant Mayor Adrian Fenty’s appeal to rehear the case before the full court. His record places him squarely in line with President Obama’s two other nominees, Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, and there is no reason to believe he would vote differently if confirmed. 

And if Richard Trumka digs him . . . 

Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee has had a friendly relationship with labor regulators at the expense of business.
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Justice Merrick Garland has a history of showing deference to federal labor regulators in reviewing unfair labor practice charges against employers. An analysis conducted by OnLabor found that Garland ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board(NLRB), a top federal labor arbiter, in 18 of 22 appeals that appeared before his court. Garland granted the agency leeway in interpreting its regulatory approach and interpretation of its mission.
“Judge Garland wrote the majority opinion in 22 cases involving appeals of NLRB decisions. In all but four, Judge Garland upheld the entirety of the NLRB’s decision finding that an employer had committed unfair labor practices,” ONLabor said in a blog post. “This deference to the NLRB has had favorable consequences for labor and unions.”
Labor unions welcomed President Obama’s nominee. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called on Senate Republicans to confirm Garland quickly, citing his “impeccable credentials and deeper experience.”
“Judge Garland’s career shows a deep commitment to public service and to the rule of law,” Trumka said in a release. “Judge Garland is a superbly qualified nominee who deserves prompt consideration and confirmation by the United States Senate. Working people deserve and expect no less.”
The NLRB serves as the nation’s top arbiter of labor disputes at the federal level and is designed to help employers, unions, and workers settle conflict outside of the judicial system. Cases begin at the local level and can be appealed all the way to the Washington, D.C.-based five-member board. Parties then have the option of appealing to their local circuit court or the D.C. Circuit.
OnLabor said Garland’s track record shows that he is generally deferential to all regulators, but noted that many of his rulings indicate a pro-union approach to labor law. In the four cases when he ruled against the NLRB he demonstrated “an outlook that is generally favorable to union activity.”

I had a feeling it wouldn't take long for what Judge Garland was really all about to surface.