Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. On SCOTUS

 

I guess I tend to think in shorter bursts than longer essays, so here are some thoughts on the Supreme Court:

1. Every time there has been a vacancy on the Court in an election year, I say again, every time, the sitting president of either party made a nomination for a new justice. 29 times in all. Presidents from Washington to Obama.

2. When the Senate and the Presidency are held by the same party for 19 of those nominations, 17 were confirmed, including some after the election. When the Senate and the Presidency were held by different parties, 10 times, only 2 were confirmed.

3. When someone tries to say that there shouldn’t be a nomination or a vote because it violates a “norm”, history shows otherwise.

4. Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s confirmation, from nomination to vote, took 42 days. Sandra Day O’Conner’s took 33 days. From today, September 21, to Election Day, November 3, is 43 days. (Yes, I know the nomination won’t be announced until the weekend.)

5. Today, September 21, is the 39th anniversary of O’Conner’s confirmation vote. (Just as a Republican first put a woman on the Supreme Court, I expect the first woman president will also be a Republican.)

6. Now for some politics. Does anyone think that the Democrats, if in the exact same circumstances, holding both the Senate and the White House, would hesitate to nominate and confirm a Justice? Can anyone look at any Democrat in the Senate and say he or she would refuse to expedite a nominee? Is there any Dem who would state they would not vote for their party’s nominee? Here, let me make a list. Hmmm, maybe Manchin, . . . Okay I’m done. Anyone else?

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 40 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. WI Con Member
    WI Con Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Great information there that I hadn’t read in all the ‘gas’that’s been spewed about this.

    Well done & thanks.

    • #1
    • September 21, 2020, at 11:57 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  2. Ekosj Member

    DonWatt: Now for some politics. Does anyone think that the Democrats, if in the exact same circumstances, holding both the Senate and the White House, would hesitate to nominate and confirm a Justice?

    Heavens no. Barack Obama would already be confirmed as the most recent addition to the newly expanded 15 member court. This historic event would be celebrated as the first time a husband and wife both served on the Court.

    • #2
    • September 21, 2020, at 12:22 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  3. RushBabe49 Thatcher

    It is time for Mitch McConnell to corral his caucus. He needs to lay down the law to all the Republican Senators, and indicate that they will ALL be expected to vote in favor of the President’s nominee, whomever it will be. No uncertain terms, no waffling, no “preferences”. Cubed, for those on the Judiciary Committee. No hesitation, no speaking to the so-called “press”.

    • #3
    • September 21, 2020, at 12:23 PM PDT
    • 12 likes
  4. Arahant Member

    DonWatt:

    6. Now for some politics. Does anyone think that the Democrats, if in the exact same circumstances, holding both the Senate and the White House, would hesitate to nominate and confirm a Justice? Can anyone look at any Democrat in the Senate and say he or she would refuse to expedite a nominee? Is there any Dem who would state they would not vote for their party’s nominee? Here, let me make a list. Hmmm, maybe Manchin, . . . Okay I’m done. Anyone else?

    Exactly.

    • #4
    • September 21, 2020, at 12:25 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  5. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    They need to fill the SCOTUS position and let the Democrat craziness kill the Biden election.

    • #5
    • September 21, 2020, at 12:29 PM PDT
    • 9 likes
  6. Kozak Member
    Kozak Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Just for fun, if Trump wins the election, and the GOP takes the house and senate, they should then inform the Democrats that they think their court packing idea is grand, and Trump is immediately going to nominate 2 more justices for the expanded 11 member SCOTUS….

    • #6
    • September 21, 2020, at 12:35 PM PDT
    • 23 likes
  7. Hoyacon Member

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    It is time for Mitch McConnell to corral his caucus. He needs to lay down the law to all the Republican Senators, and indicate that they will ALL be expected to vote in favor of the President’s nominee, whomever it will be. No uncertain terms, no waffling, no “preferences”. Cubed, for those on the Judiciary Committee. No hesitation, no speaking to the so-called “press”.

    He also needs to move things along, especially if Martha McSally’s vote is needed (e.g., in the event Murkowski, Collins, and Mittens don’t toe the line). McSally was appointed (not elected), and can be replaced almost immediately (unlike losing elected Senators) in the wake of an expected defeat to Mr. Gabby Giffords.

    • #7
    • September 21, 2020, at 12:44 PM PDT
    • 7 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  8. SpiritO'78 Member

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Just for fun, if Trump wins the election, and the GOP takes the house and senate, they should then inform the Democrats that they think their court packing idea is grand, and Trump is immediately going to nominate 2 more justices for the expanded 11 member SCOTUS….

    Court packing doesn’t work for the Right even though it would be a good joke. The court tends to drift left over time. I’m sure there is a reason for this I just don’t know what it is.

    • #8
    • September 21, 2020, at 1:10 PM PDT
    • Like
  9. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    I am somewhat confused on why a Republican senator would go down and not voting on a SCOTUS nominee before the nominee is even submitted. Can they not at least find out who they are before deciding they are unfit?

    • #9
    • September 21, 2020, at 1:22 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  10. Kozak Member
    Kozak Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    SpiritO’78 (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Just for fun, if Trump wins the election, and the GOP takes the house and senate, they should then inform the Democrats that they think their court packing idea is grand, and Trump is immediately going to nominate 2 more justices for the expanded 11 member SCOTUS….

    Court packing doesn’t work for the Right even though it would be a good joke. The court tends to drift left over time. I’m sure there is a reason for this I just don’t know what it is.

    Not if you pick Scalias or Thomases. You just can’t pick a squish.

    • #10
    • September 21, 2020, at 1:55 PM PDT
    • 8 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  11. DonWatt Coolidge
    DonWatt

    Kozak (View Comment):

    SpiritO’78 (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Just for fun, if Trump wins the election, and the GOP takes the house and senate, they should then inform the Democrats that they think their court packing idea is grand, and Trump is immediately going to nominate 2 more justices for the expanded 11 member SCOTUS….

    Court packing doesn’t work for the Right even though it would be a good joke. The court tends to drift left over time. I’m sure there is a reason for this I just don’t know what it is.

    Not if you pick Scalias or Thomases. You just can’t pick a squish.

    Any discussion of court packing has to include the realization that that move changes the court into a permanently partisan body. Any future election would inevitably change the makeup of the court. “You add two, then I’ll add two.” This eventually renders the court into a third legislative branch. We already have two barely functioning houses. I don’t think we need a third. I hope we can avoid this outcome.

    • #11
    • September 21, 2020, at 2:12 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  12. PHCheese Member

    DonWatt (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    SpiritO’78 (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Just for fun, if Trump wins the election, and the GOP takes the house and senate, they should then inform the Democrats that they think their court packing idea is grand, and Trump is immediately going to nominate 2 more justices for the expanded 11 member SCOTUS….

    Court packing doesn’t work for the Right even though it would be a good joke. The court tends to drift left over time. I’m sure there is a reason for this I just don’t know what it is.

    Not if you pick Scalias or Thomases. You just can’t pick a squish.

    Any discussion of court packing has to include the realization that that move changes the court into a permanently partisan body. Any future election would inevitably change the makeup of the court. “You add two, then I’ll add two.” This eventually renders the court into a third legislative branch. We already have two barely functioning houses. I don’t think we need a third. I hope we can avoid this outcome.

    We don’t already have a third?

    • #12
    • September 21, 2020, at 5:24 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  13. Clifford A. Brown Contributor

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    I am somewhat confused on why a Republican senator would go down and not voting on a SCOTUS nominee before the nominee is even submitted. Can they not at least find out who they are before deciding they are unfit?

    The one true sacrament of abortion. That is all.

    • #13
    • September 21, 2020, at 8:54 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  14. Clifford A. Brown Contributor

    DonWatt (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    SpiritO’78 (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Just for fun, if Trump wins the election, and the GOP takes the house and senate, they should then inform the Democrats that they think their court packing idea is grand, and Trump is immediately going to nominate 2 more justices for the expanded 11 member SCOTUS….

    Court packing doesn’t work for the Right even though it would be a good joke. The court tends to drift left over time. I’m sure there is a reason for this I just don’t know what it is.

    Not if you pick Scalias or Thomases. You just can’t pick a squish.

    Any discussion of court packing has to include the realization that that move changes the court into a permanently partisan body. Any future election would inevitably change the makeup of the court. “You add two, then I’ll add two.” This eventually renders the court into a third legislative branch. We already have two barely functioning houses. I don’t think we need a third. I hope we can avoid this outcome.

    Way too late. Horses. Barn door.

    • #14
    • September 21, 2020, at 8:55 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  15. Clifford A. Brown Contributor

    Thanks for the succinct post. Right on point.

    • #15
    • September 21, 2020, at 8:57 PM PDT
    • Like
  16. DonWatt Coolidge
    DonWatt

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Thanks for the succinct post. Right on point.

    Cheers. Thanks for the comments.

    • #16
    • September 21, 2020, at 9:05 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  17. Al French of Damascus Moderator

    John Marshall was appointed Chief Justice by lame duck President Adams in 1801, after he lost election to Jefferson in 1800.

    • #17
    • September 21, 2020, at 9:51 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  18. Kozak Member
    Kozak Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    DonWatt (View Comment):
    Any discussion of court packing has to include the realization that that move changes the court into a permanently partisan body.

    That boat sailed with Roosevelt.

    • #18
    • September 22, 2020, at 4:12 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  19. Bill Nelson Member

    I am sure that no matter what, this would be contentious. But it is even more so because one of the stated reasons for not holding a vote for Garrick was that it was an election year, and Obama was not going to stay in office.

    McConnell gambled politically and won. Now he must move knowing that Trump will not be president and it is likely that republicans lose control of the senate. Will the nomination effect senate races? Unknown.

    • #19
    • September 22, 2020, at 6:07 AM PDT
    • Like
  20. Bill Nelson Member

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    I am somewhat confused on why a Republican senator would go down and not voting on a SCOTUS nominee before the nominee is even submitted. Can they not at least find out who they are before deciding they are unfit?

    A person can clearly see that this inflames hot political passions even more, and may push the nation to a breaking point (whatever the break may be). One can also see that allowing Biden the pick doesn’t change the court, trading one liberal for another.

    A purely political view is that such a move would further tarnish the Republican brand in the eyes of many voters. More negative effects downstream.

    • #20
    • September 22, 2020, at 6:18 AM PDT
    • Like
  21. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    Bill Nelson (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    I am somewhat confused on why a Republican senator would go down and not voting on a SCOTUS nominee before the nominee is even submitted. Can they not at least find out who they are before deciding they are unfit?

    A person can clearly see that this inflames hot political passions even more, and may push the nation to a breaking point (whatever the break may be). One can also see that allowing Biden the pick doesn’t change the court, trading one liberal for another.

    A purely political view is that such a move would further tarnish the Republican brand in the eyes of many voters. More negative effects downstream.

    I wish the Republicans would stop playing to help the Democrats. To give the Democrats most of what they want because they will burn down the cities. Let them burn

    • #21
    • September 22, 2020, at 6:31 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  22. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    It’s kind of sweet how Democrats have been threatening violence and a coup if the election isn’t overwhelmingly decided for Biden, making it absolutely imperative that a 9th justice is seated. That’s what I like to call “comeuppance.” 

    • #22
    • September 22, 2020, at 7:32 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  23. Weeping Member

    DonWatt: 6. Now for some politics. Does anyone think that the Democrats, if in the exact same circumstances, holding both the Senate and the White House, would hesitate to nominate and confirm a Justice? Can anyone look at any Democrat in the Senate and say he or she would refuse to expedite a nominee? Is there any Dem who would state they would not vote for their party’s nominee? Here, let me make a list. Hmmm, maybe Manchin, . . . Okay I’m done. Anyone else?

    No, I don’t think they would hesitate – not even if their candidate was “behind in the polls” as Trump has supposedly been. I think they’d fill it as soon as they possibly could.

    • #23
    • September 22, 2020, at 7:55 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  24. Kozak Member
    Kozak Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Bill Nelson (View Comment):

    I am sure that no matter what, this would be contentious. But it is even more so because one of the stated reasons for not holding a vote for Garrick was that it was an election year, and Obama was not going to stay in office.

    McConnell gambled politically and won. Now he must move knowing that Trump will not be president and it is likely that republicans lose control of the senate. Will the nomination effect senate races? Unknown.

    I remember 2 years ago all the threats about if the Senators voted for Kavanaugh they would lose.

    And yet, the GOP ended up picking up seats because the base and independents were so pissed off at the mistreatment he got. The GOP should press ahead with a vote. It’s why we elected them.

    • #24
    • September 22, 2020, at 8:01 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  25. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Bill Nelson (View Comment):

    I am sure that no matter what, this would be contentious. But it is even more so because one of the stated reasons for not holding a vote for Garrick was that it was an election year, and Obama was not going to stay in office.

    McConnell gambled politically and won. Now he must move knowing that Trump will not be president and it is likely that republicans lose control of the senate. Will the nomination effect senate races? Unknown.

    I remember 2 years ago all the threats about if the Senators voted for Kavanaugh they would lose.

    And yet, the GOP ended up picking up seats because the base and independents were so pissed off at the mistreatment he got. The GOP should press ahead with a vote. It’s why we elected them.

    I hope the GOP remembers this. But I am not sure they will. MSM is a powerful propaganda tool the Left uses and they are very good at it. Now that the social platforms are bringing their power to the Lefts will it is even worse. Some how these news media sources repeat items enough that people start believing it though their lived experience is different.

    • #25
    • September 22, 2020, at 8:27 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  26. Chuck Thatcher

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    I am somewhat confused on why a Republican senator would go down and not voting on a SCOTUS nominee before the nominee is even submitted. Can they not at least find out who they are before deciding they are unfit?

    What Republican voter would think President Harris might nominate a better candidate than Trump would nominate? (Well I suppose there is one.)

    • #26
    • September 22, 2020, at 8:28 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  27. MichaelKennedy Coolidge

    SpiritO'78 (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Just for fun, if Trump wins the election, and the GOP takes the house and senate, they should then inform the Democrats that they think their court packing idea is grand, and Trump is immediately going to nominate 2 more justices for the expanded 11 member SCOTUS….

    Court packing doesn’t work for the Right even though it would be a good joke. The court tends to drift left over time. I’m sure there is a reason for this I just don’t know what it is.

    The Justices all live in DC. Everyone who lives in DC drifts left over time. Some are slower to drift. It took a second wife for Barry Goldwater to drift noticeably left.

    • #27
    • September 22, 2020, at 8:50 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  28. Eridemus Coolidge

    For me, it’s really simple aside from the basic legality that he is President and the Senate holds the power to confirm. In emotional = political terms, the left DESERVES THIS. How can they expect special courtesy when they and their press have invested the entire last 4 years in hating/tarnishing/harrassing/insulting the administration and its supporters? Let the dice fall where they may, the court may be the last best chance for at least applying some brakes to the left but that is almost beside the point to me. Philosophical matters aren’t where they play ball. An appointment must also be for conservatives a basic given by natural forces payback for the judge not retiring once she couldn’t function and their slimy tactics with Kavanaugh that went far beyond the arena of normal expression of differences. There hasn’t even been basic ethics or decorum, much less any civil engagement by their side for one full term. Let the clock rule. A delay and giving them one more (this time, black) Kagan/Sotomayor won’t make them turn civil anyway.

    • #28
    • September 22, 2020, at 9:59 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  29. DonWatt Coolidge
    DonWatt

    Eridemus (View Comment):

    For me, it’s really simple aside from the basic legality that he is President and the Senate holds the power to confirm. In emotional = political terms, the left DESERVES THIS. How can they expect special courtesy when they and their press have invested the entire last 4 years in hating/tarnishing/harrassing/insulting the administration and its supporters? Let the dice fall where they may, the court may be the last best chance for at least applying some brakes to the left but that is almost beside the point to me. Philosophical matters aren’t where they play ball. An appointment must also be for conservatives a basic given by natural forces payback for the judge not retiring once she couldn’t function and their slimy tactics with Kavanaugh that went far beyond the arena of normal expression of differences. There hasn’t even been basic ethics or decorum, much less any civil engagement by their side for one full term. Let the clock rule. A delay and giving them one more (this time, black) Kagan/Sotomayor won’t make them turn civil anyway.

    I agree completely.
    Let me also say the reason Dem tactics go so over the top is that they have become accustomed to using the courts when they are unable to steer the national agenda through an election. We will see this more and more in the next few weeks as lower court judges are completely rewriting election law to their preference, often opposed to a legitimate legislative intent.

    • #29
    • September 22, 2020, at 10:33 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  30. Brian Watt Member
    Brian Watt Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    In the coming days, I hope to see the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate drag Chuck Schumer from the Senate Floor. I have plenty of popcorn on hand.

    • #30
    • September 22, 2020, at 10:40 AM PDT
    • 4 likes