[E-Daily Reporter LEE JI-EUN ] The conflict between the Blue House and the Supreme Court over the resubmission of Supreme Court justice nominees has been escalating day by day. After Chief Justice Cho Hee-dae rejected the Blue House’s request for resubmission the previous day and issued a follow-up statement, the Blue House countered with a third statement, and the back-and-forth between the two sides continues.

In a supplementary statement on the 23rd, Chief Justice Cho reiterated that the Blue House’s official letter dated August 28 requesting the resubmission of the nominee did not provide specific reasons or constitutional grounds. He clarified that his reference to Article 82 of the Constitution the previous day was not intended to highlight a formal defect in the official letter, stating, “Only when clear grounds and reasons are presented in the text of the official letter can its validity be undisputed, and procedures in accordance with the Constitution and laws be carried out.”

He also countered the Blue House’s claim that there were procedural flaws in the referral process, stating, “Based on the provisions of the Constitution and the law, this is difficult to accept.” However, regarding the public inconvenience caused by the prolonged vacancy on the Supreme Court bench, he said, “I deeply regret this,” and added, “I will do my best to ensure the process is concluded swiftly.”

Earlier, on the 22nd, Chief Justice Cho issued a statement formalizing his position that he would not comply with the request for a re-nomination, stating, “I cannot find any specific constitutional basis or grounds to justify the request for a re-nomination.” This came 25 days after the Blue House requested the re-nomination on the 28th of last month. On the same day, the Blue House issued two statements in a single day—an unusual move—and launched a full-scale rebuttal.

In a third statement on the 23rd, the Blue House refuted Chief Justice Cho’s additional remarks point by point. In particular, it emphasized that the official letter requesting the disciplinary review dated August 28 clearly contained the President’s position on refusing the appointment and the grounds for the request.

A Blue House official stated, “Yesterday, the Chief Justice distorted the official document to make it seem as if it were flawed due to a lack of constitutional documentation or procedural compliance, but today he backed down, claiming it was merely a general statement,” adding “Even though four candidates were lawfully recommended by the Supreme Court Justice Nomination Committee in accordance with the Court Organization Act, contacting the candidates individually to ask if they would withdraw—in order to restart the nomination process without any legal basis—constitutes a serious procedural flaw,” the official criticized.

The ruling Democratic Party of Korea labeled Chief Justice Cho’s refusal to resubmit the nomination as a “judicial coup” and “civil unrest,” launching a strong-arm response that included visiting the Supreme Court in person. Some hardliners are even reviving calls for impeachment.

Meanwhile, People Power Party Leader Jang Dong-hyuk criticized the ruling camp, saying, “Stop ‘shopping’ for Supreme Court justices for President Lee Jae-myung’s trial.” Independent lawmaker Han Dong-hoon also argued, “The Chief Justice acted in accordance with the Constitution, but if the President uses his authority to undermine the separation of powers, the Republic of Korea will not tolerate it,” adding, “If there is even an attempt to impeach Chief Justice Cho, President Lee will be the one impeached.”