I buried my head in my hands when I learned Friday night that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. Grief was all there was to feel. Before I get into politics, I want to express my admiration for Ginsburg’s years of service to the American judiciary.
She was a brilliant jurist who had reached the pinnacle of her profession. She championed liberty and justice from the bench, joining the majority in crucial decisions that aided women, gays and those seeking access to health care. Ginsburg was so much more than just a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States.
Ginsburg is perhaps most famous for her dissents — the Bush v. Gore dissent is my favorite of hers and is worth a read. May she rest in peace.
Now, I want to assuage liberals’ fears about what happens next vis-à-vis the selection of Ginsburg’s replacement.
I will start with the premise that Democrats win back the Senate and the presidency, because if they do not, then the Republicans would fill Ginsburg’s vacancy in the usual way. If my premise comes true, the vacancy battle is a winning one for Democrats.
I will evaluate the likely scenarios, of which there are about two.
The first scenario is more boring and, in my opinion, the most likely outcome. Suppose the Democrats and the two independents in the Senate remain united in blocking a confirmation until the next president takes office. In that case, they will have a combined 47 votes, only needing to peel off four Republican votes to block the nomination.
Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, have already committed to not confirming a new justice until after the elections in November. Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, voted to remove the president in the impeachment trial earlier this year, and I have a feeling he will thumb his nose at the president again by denying him an appointment to the Supreme Court until next year.
I am looking at my senator, Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley, a man I respect, as one of the names in play to be the decisive fourth vote Democrats need. In addition to saying he wouldn’t hold a hearing for President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year, Grassley also showed independence when he put two of the Trump administration’s nominees on hold while investigating why Trump dismissed inspectors general.
But what if none of that happens? What if the craven Republicans go back on the precedent they set in 2016? Will democracy be over? Will the court shift hard to the right for decades to come?
No.
Democrats have been losing Supreme Court battles for a long time — they have only appointed four of the last 19 justices successfully confirmed to the Supreme Court. Because Democrats have been on the losing end of these critical appointments for so long, I feel they’ll be itching to go “the Chicago way.”
Republicans pull a knife; Democrats pull a gun. Republicans steal two seats on the Supreme Court; Democrats add two justices to the Supreme Court.
This situation, assuming Democrats win the Senate and presidency, is a lose-lose for Republicans.
Either they do not get a nominee pushed through, and Biden replaces Ginsburg’s vacancy, or Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., pushes through a nominee and voters retaliate, making Republican senators in competitive races even more vulnerable to defeat.
I think such retaliation would give Democrats a greater chance of taking back the Senate, which would allow them to eliminate the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court with the justices they prefer.
McConnell’s dirty tricks and hardball will not serve him if Republicans lose in November. If he pushes a nominee through, his high-stakes hypocrisy will finally come back to haunt him.
