There was never any real doubt that Republicans would move swiftly to fill the seat of the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And now a number of key Republican senators have come out to endorse Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) effort to do so. Whether a vote will happen before or after Election Day remains something of an open question, but once McConnell has the votes he will say “go.”
Join
As you’ve seen me argue, Democrats must add either two or four seats to the Supreme Court if Republicans proceed with another corrupt Court appointment and Democrats win the presidency and the Senate. There may be other remedies I haven’t thought of. There may be better ones. But I’m certain we are at the point where a real, practical and credible remedy is essential. With that in mind I wanted to make a point about general principles.
JoinOver the weekend I had a specific granular COVID-safety related question that I wanted an answer to to guide our family’s safety protocols. It was a weird response to observe in myself that I routinely disregarded information from the CDC and the FDA as I searched for information on Google. Today we have another good example of why they’ve lost credibility.
President Trump wasted no time declaring when his SCOTUS nomination announcement will be because the Senate majority leader wasted no time — literally no time, maybe minutes after the late justice’s death broke news Friday night — to declare he’d bring him or her to the Senate floor.
JoinI’ve told you many times that elite DC journalism is wired for the GOP. That continues to be the case, notwithstanding the political shifts in the country over the last twenty years. It continues to be the case even as it is driven by stakeholders who in many cases are not themselves Republicans or conservatives.
Here’s a tweet this morning from Axios, the preeminent insider DC publication.
Furious Democrats are considering total war — profound changes to two branches of government, and even adding stars to the flag — if Republicans jam through a Supreme Court nominee, then lose control of the Senate. https://t.co/H7RV446zdW
— Axios (@axios) September 20, 2020
Mainer TPM Reader AF follows up with some important detail and correction about my note on Susan Collins and her statement. I stand by the point I made last night. But it was an – I hope – uncharacteristic imprecision to call it a “promise”. As AF states, it’s definitely not. If Collins thinks it is in her interest I definitely think she will vote to confirm before the election. And I think it’s highly likely she’ll do so, win or lose, during the lame duck session after the election. But my same point holds, she’s judged it is strongly against her interest to vote at all before the election. It’s Democrats’ challenge to press her on this purported commitment and her history of breaking such commitments for the next six weeks. TPM Reader AF …
Susan Collins’ statement is punditry, without any promised actions.
Collins said a vote on a nomination should wait until after the election. She didn’t say a word about what she would do or not do.
Take a closer look at Collins’ statement. She says Trump has the right to make a nomination. She says she has “no objection to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s beginning the process of reviewing his nominee’s credentials.” After that she says there shouldn’t be a vote before the election.
Collins’ decision here on replacing Justice Ginsburg is very interesting. What’s notable here is her priorities: She wants to be reelected. And she sees – rightly – that a pre-election confirmation fight likely seals her fate.
Defeat is currently likely but not inevitable. Now she can spend the last six weeks of the campaign playing to what has always been her electoral strength: the principled moderate who isn’t beholden to her party. The alternative is absolutely lethal for her reelection prospects: closing the final six weeks of the campaign with an exercise that puts the lie to the whole premise of her candidacy.
If she thought it would help her I think she will go back on this promise in a second. But I’m not sure she will. Because this course seems clearly in line with preserving her seat.
Lindsey Graham is exactly who we knew him to be. Susan Collins? She’s not as she usually is, notoriously concerned. But let’s wait and see.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death is a grave, sorrowful and ill-timed calamity in the escalating crisis of American democracy, the crisis of the American state. The only relevant and timely thing I can think to add is this: You can’t work this kind of problem or operate in this kind of environment unless you’re ready to say what you’re going to do. You can’t start by saying McConnell has to follow his rule. You need to say what you’ll do when he doesn’t. Otherwise you’ve got one side with words and the other with the ability to act. And that’s a loser’s hand.
The thing to do, if Republicans take this course and the Democrats take the presidency and the Senate, to add either two or four new seats to the Supreme Court, for a total of 11 or 13.