This is a jumping off point for a debate with the following hypothetical predicates:
(1) Democrats filibuster Gorsuch;
(2) Republicans remove the filibuster rule for Supreme Court nominees;
(3) Gorsuch is confirmed to the seat held by Scalia;
(4) RBG suffers a decline in health (God forbid), wins the lottery, or encounters some other set of events that lead to her absence during the Trump administration.
I regard these as reasonable suppositions for the purposes of a debate, but if you can’t resist fighting one of the hypotheticals, I’d ask that you recognize that the purpose of this thread is to not fight those hypotheticals.
What approach might the Democrats bring into play to derail the Trump nominee? Unlike Gorsuch for Scalia, a NewGuy for RBG would shift the ideological balance of the Court, and presumably be of far greater concern – certainly not of LESS concern, anyway – than the Gorsuch confirmation we are playing out now.
Trump’s already published a list of judges he regards as good candidates; it’s one of the very few things he’s done with which I find myself simpatico. But would he even stick to it? No reason he shouldn’t. . . except for the track record he has of defying norms of political behavior. Would he go into crazy mode and pick someone new, and crazy, secure in a filibuster-free Senate?
I have the idea (or maybe just the forlorn hope) that he’d stay with the list, but from the Democrats’ perspective, that’s probably still unacceptable, especially as a replacement for the brilliant RBG.
What would happen?