Skip to content
Subscribe

Trump's Low Polling Numbers Force Senate To Rethink SCOTUS Nomination

Trump's Low Polling Numbers Force Senate To Rethink SCOTUS Nomination
Published:

It's now been 169 days since President Obama nominated Chief Judge Merrick Garland to fill Justice Antonin Scalia's vacant seat on the Supreme Court.

The waiting game to act on Garland's nomination has become status quo in the headlines. It's just assumed now that action on the nomination will have to wait until after November's election.

But at least some Republican senators are questioning this tactic, realizing what would be at stake if Trump lost his bid for the presidency -- or even worse if the Republicans also lost their control over the Senate.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley hinted this week that hearings could take place during a 'lame duck' session of Congress -- and while this was quickly countered by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's office, even the consideration is showing the angst within the rank-and-file Republicans.

'What if?' is too powerful of a motivator in this high-stakes game of political Russian-roulette, with the worst outcome being a Clinton victory paired with a withdrawal of Garland's nomination by President Obama.

In a field of unlimited uncertainty, Garland has at least some qualities that are appealing to the conservatives.

He's a decade older than the last three justices were at time of appointment. Like it or not, the length of tenure is certainly a factor to consider.

With a lengthy history on the bench and more moderate appeal than Kagan or Sotomayor, a partial victory of confirming a more moderate justice would be a bitter pill to swallow, but it would still be better than being forced to consider a more liberal nominee.

And they also have to consider that many of the 4-4 ties at the Supreme Court have been outright losses -- most recently the N. Carolina voting laws being blocked, but also a long stream of tied rulings that will eventually be revisited by the court.

But one thing is certain, as rhetoric heats up on both sides about the Senate's inaction, it will be a tell-tale sign of how the political fortune tellers are reading the signs for the next two months.

Because one side will use this nomination as a political weapon, while the other will use it as damage control -- and it's not totally apparent yet which role each party will be taking.

Photo Credit: Albert H. Teich / Shutterstock.com

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Trump's Low Polling Numbers Force Senate To Rethink SCOTUS Nomination

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us