[ad_1]
WASHINGTON – The death of a warrior of the law and the seemingly indomitable Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday at age 87 after a long battle with cancer has put the central agenda of the American conservatives within reach of temptation, deepening the stakes in the next election.
The sudden vacancy he left is destined to shift the balance of the nine-seat Supreme Court bench to the Conservatives for decades to come.
Justices of the United States Supreme Court are appointed for life or until they retire.
President Donald Trump now has the opportunity, with a Republican-majority Senate, to approve a nomination while still in office, or risk losing power and leaving the nomination to the Democrats.
Early on Saturday (September 19), in a tweet addressed to the Republican Party, he said: “We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of whom has it has been considered the selection of the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. We have this obligation, without delay! “
The appointment of a new judge now opens the door to reverse the achievements of liberals and progressives, in terms of women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, gun control, and even since the landmark 1973 Roe v Wade ruling that decriminalized abortion. Which has been in the conservatives’ views ever since.
A 2016 Pew Research Center poll found that 65 percent of voters cited Supreme Court appointments as an important factor in their voting decision. Now, the fight to fill Ginsburg’s seat adds another dimension to the bitterness of America’s political divide, less than 50 days before the November 3 election.
Reportedly, a few days before her death, Ginsburg issued a statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera, saying: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”
But even as hundreds spontaneously gathered in the Supreme Court late Friday night in Washington, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was signaling that he was in a hurry to replace Ginsburg, stating that “the presidential candidate Trump will receive a vote in the United States Senate. “
It was in stark contrast to his own statement in February 2016 when, also faced with a vacant Supreme Court court seat following the death of Antonin Scalia, a leading conservative voice, McConnell had then said: “The American people should have a voice in the selection of your next Supreme Court justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president. “
The Republicans successfully stopped the occupation of the post, deeply irritating the Democrats. Then-President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland did not even receive a Republican-controlled Senate hearing.
In the end, President Trump made two appointments, both conservatives, to the Supreme Court. The first was Judge Neil Gorsuch in early 2017; second Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, who replaced retired Justice Anthony Kennedy.
The court of the Supreme Court is therefore ideologically conservative; another conservative appointment will incline him decisively. Making a third date would be a lasting legacy for President Trump.
Meanwhile, the gap between the two sides on the Supreme Court has widened. In August 2019, Pew Research found that three-quarters of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents had a favorable opinion of the Supreme Court, compared to only about half (49 percent) of Democrats and Democrats. “The 26 percentage point difference between the two parties is among the widest in the past two decades,” said the Pew research.
Not all Republicans will necessarily agree with the President and Senator McConnell. But having six Republican-appointed justices on the bench is such an opportunity that it’s hard to imagine the party passing it up.
And while it would be unusually quick to complete the entire confirmation process in less than 50 days, it is possible. Alternatively, the Senate could even go ahead with hearings and confirm what would be a pathetic appointment even if President Trump and some incumbent senators lose the election.
An additional specter looms: a Supreme Court charged with ruling on a disputed electoral result. In that sense, the composition of the bank is even more critical in the short term, for President Trump, who has explicitly questioned the integrity and credibility of the electoral process, apparently to prepare the ground to dispute the result in case of losing.
“Ginsburg’s death creates a new dynamic if there is an election-related dispute before the Court,” Five Thirty Eight, a political analysis website, said in a comment.
“Whether the court is 5-3 (with Ginsburg’s seat unoccupied) or 6-3 (with a Trump candidate seated), Democrats would need two votes from the appointed judges (Republicans) to win a case. Of Election dispute that comes to court, that’s bad news for Democrats. It raises the specter of a 4-4 tie in a crucial election-related case, a potential deadlock that could make it difficult to know who won the presidential race. “
“One of the most divisive elections in American history now will likely be even more tense and tense,” he added.
[ad_2]
