It will be interesting to see how the President’s COVID diagnosis impacts Barret’s confirmation. It’s looking like the Rose Garden ceremony where Trump introduced her was a “spreader” event, and there were at least seven Republican Senators in attendance. Senator Mike Lee was among them, and he has already tested positive.
At the very least, the additional precautions and protocols they’ll have to adopt for committee hearings and the floor will complicate and slow things down a bit. And if you do have multiple Republican Senators who test positive, and some who develop symptoms (perhaps seriously so, given the average age in the Senate) it could complicate McConnel getting his full caucus to the floor for a vote. There’s no procedure in the Senate for remote or proxy voting.
Thom Tillis too…
So what does this do for the nomination? If Collins and Murkowsky (?) hold firm the Reps don’t have enough for the vote. Would the senators break quarantine? What if a few more test positive? If the stakes weren’t so large this would be fascinating.
I should clarify – Senators cannot vote by proxy on the floor. Proxy voting is allowed in committee, so the Senate Judiciary Committee could still vote out her nomination as long as one Republican Senator can drag himself to the committee room.
From what I hear from Republican circles, the Barret appointment could cost Trump the election (if he wasn’t losing anyway). The reason is simple: Lots of Republicans don’t like Trump, but they are scared of what Democrats might do once in power so they’ve been reluctantly supporting him.
But with a 6-3 conservative majority on the court, they feel protected enough to take a chance on the Democrats, trusting the Supreme court to hold the constitutional line.
It makes sense. I’d say at least half of Trump ‘supporters’ are actually lesser-of-two-evils voters voting defensively. Take away the need for defense, and they can dump the guy. They won’t vote Biden maybe, but they will stay home on election day.
I believe 3 Republican Senators so far have COVID. It wouldn’t take many more for Republicans to not even have enough for a quorum, and the widespread COVID would be a perfect reason for the Democrats to refuse to even show up for the confirmation hearings.
I think this very quick confirmation plan could be in some doubt. Still a long shot, but better than it was a few days ago. The Democrats need to do anything and everything they can to try and delay this confirmation.
my prediction of covid dealing with the nomination seems to be working. the garden announcement became a super spreader. this could delay the vote until after election day, then arizona’s senate seat will be in play.
What if they can’t have the vote until after Mark Kelly takes his seat? Then it’s potentially down to one GOP senator being under quarantine to stop it.
This puts Republicans in a bit of a quandary. They can continue to flout social distancing guidelines (as the White House appears to be doing) but that has a non trivial chance at spoiling Barrett’s nomination.
I have no doubt that McConnell and Graham will push forward with the confirmation, maybe with some superficial new protocols (“we’re super serious about wearing facemasks now, guys”). But what’s happening with the President can’t help but make some Republican senators ask themselves whether they are literally willing to die for a 6-3 Supreme Court majority. When faced with this stark reality, I can’t help but think that someone with a foot already out the door like Lamar Alexander or Pat Roberts might decide that a few more years with the grandkids is more important.
I think that only comes into play if someone dies. Senators get the best healthcare in the world and if none of the current spate of infections die it may not seem much of a risk.
They are also pretty old, and at high risk for that.
It’s not that improbable that a couple of them succumb, or are unable to perform their duties, which just means that McConnel is going to use that as an excuse to sped up the timetable on the nomination.
I’ll try not to belabor the point too much but Trump is getting experimental treatment likely not available to the general population. If senators think they’ll get the same treatment (and assuming they think it’s likely to work) then it’s not much of a risk in their eyes.
I readily admit that some of these senators are not too smart, but still I think they realize that experimental medicines are not to be assumed to be magic cures, even if they do end up as something that “works” in some statistically or even clinically significant manner.
Many of them are high risk individuals.
Of course GOP senators love her. She’s just as much of a hypocrite as they are.
It’s difficult to understand how a judge, whom is supposed to be an impartial arbiter of the law can talk in terms of “conservative” and “liberal” instead of judicial philosophies.
In most sane worlds, this admission of the partisanship of seeing issues in terms of republican and democratic would be automatically disqualifying.
SCOTUS, and the rest of the judiciary is no long apolitical, but is instead simply another partisan arm of the GOP.
Anyone worried about the court losing legitimacy doesn’t realize that that ship has already sailed due to McConnel’s chicanery.
I have listened to about two hours of the confirmation hearings and I have reached a few conclusions. I will add I have not read this entire thread but believe I have some insight to share.
- She is never going to answer a direct question unless it reflects well on her.
- She is very moral and has a huge respect for law and precedent.
- No hypothetical question can be even considered as a sitting judge.
- She has a very moral and complex and legal process of considering each and every thing that may possibly come before her and such questions will be judged by law and precedent and certainly not influenced by her personal views. Sacred and moral is her duty.
- Each and every item that comes before her will result in a finding EXACTLY as we think and fear they will be found without regard to the law and precedent. Additionally, she will never recues (sp?) herself under any circumstance no matter how obvious the conflict of interest might be.
Just curious - what do you mean by “very moral”?
I agree that she has a personal ethic/sense of morality, but isn’t it up to each of us to opine whether we believe she is a moral individual?
Without any personal attack implied, I read that differently in my mind:
… most important in the long run for the future destruction of America.