That said, I would have preferred that the Republicans had given Garland a fair hearing. Perhaps they could have kept us off the road we're on now. With Scalia, the opening came nine months before the election. But the slope can get slippery very quickly. Next time it could be an opening eleven months before the election. Then thirteen months. Where does one draw the line? And why there? Politicians may start making assertions couched as principled stands, but -- as with Biden's and Schumer's arguments, these will be matters of naked political expedience.I wrote that in April, 2017, when I was talking about the Senate confirmation of Judge Gorsuch. And I was right, as we are now seeing with the rhetoric over Judge Kennedy's announced retirement. That post was here.
And don't start with the disingenuous arguments about how this isn;t an escalation because we're less than nine months away. Everyone knows that all the rhetoric about Garland (and the Biden and Schumer quotes that the Republicans used for cover) were references to Presidential elections. By the way, it's also important to remember that Kagan was nominated and confirmed in 2010 -- another year of midterm Senatorial elections.
But, rhetoric aside, the Democrats are really limited in their weapons. Blame Harry Reid for his destruction of the filibuster.
Still, there are a couple of aspects that I find interesting:
The Republicans only have 51 Senators, and John McCain is incapacitated. So, for practical purposes, they have a bare majority of 50-49. They can't afford any defections. Which brings us to Susan Collins of Maine who has indicated that she won't support a nominee who she thinks is hostile to Roe v. Wade. That effectively gives her a veto. It kind of strengthens the argument that McCain should have retired earlier. And if Ginsburg dies in a circumstance where Trump (or a Republican successor) gets to pick her replacement, it will strengthen the argument that she should have retired when Obama was President.
Trump and the Republican senators are in a rush to nominate and confirm a replacement for Kennedy before the midterms because there's a very real possibility of the Democrats winning back the Senate. But that's not guaranteed. It'll be kind of interesting if Trump picks a relative moderate in order to secure Collins' vote, and then the Republicans have a net gain in the midterms.
And, on that note, keep in mind that Ginsburg is 84 and Breyer is 78. Trump could, conceivably, nominate their replacements. You think the fighting is nasty now?
You're assuming all Democratic senators will vote no. They do in fact seem to march in lockstep, certainly more than Republicans do. However, I did hear that there are a few Dems in deep red states that might need to vote yes to keep their jobs. Will be interesting if it comes to that.
ReplyDeleteIf Susan Collins votes no, it's hard for a Democrat to vote yes. We'll see...
Delete