Why GOP hopes filling a Supreme Court seat will sway voters

Republicans are optimistic that a U.S. Supreme Court nomination battle will unite the party as it faces a tough fight for the White House and Senate.

Patrick Semansky/AP
Supporters of President Donald Trump gather outside Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Virginia, Sept. 20, 2020, before the departure of Mr. Trump's motorcade.

Four years ago, the allure of conservative Supreme Court appointments helped persuade skeptical Republicans to support Donald Trump for president. Two years ago, a contentious clash over Mr. Trump's choice of Brett Kavanaugh for the court was credited with bolstering GOP gains in the Senate in an otherwise bad midterm election.

And now, just 44 days before Mr. Trump's reelection will be decided, Republicans are again looking to a Supreme Court nomination fight to unite a deeply fractured party as it faces the very real possibility of losing the White House and control of the Senate this fall.

GOP leaders are optimistic they can pull it off. In the turbulent Trump era, nothing has motivated the Republican Party's disparate factions to come home quite like the prospect of a lifetime appointment to the nation's highest court.

“This can be an important galvanizing force for President Trump,” said Leonard Leo, co-chairman of the conservative Federalist Society who has advised the Trump administration on its first two confirmations – for Neil Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh.

The emerging nomination debate that follows the death Friday of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg threatens to reshuffle voter priorities in the closing weeks of an election that had been squarely focused on another set of generational issues: the pandemic, economic devastation, and deep civil unrest.

Mr. Trump, backed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, is pledging to replace the liberal Ginsburg with a conservative jurist, promising on Saturday evening that he will announce his nominee “very soon.”

Plans are in motion for a swift nomination and confirmation. Lest there be any questions about the political implications, Mr. Trump is expected to make his choice in a matter of days. Those close to the president are encouraging him to announce his pick before the first presidential debate against Democratic challenger Joe Biden on Sept. 29.

Mr. Biden said the winner of the Nov. 3 election should choose the next justice. Mr. Biden's team is skeptical that the Supreme Court clash will fundamentally change the contours of a race Mr. Trump was trailing so close to Election Day. Indeed, five states are already voting.

In fact, Democrats say it could motivate voters to fight harder against Mr. Trump and Republicans as the Senate breaks the norms with an unprecedented confirmation at a time when Americans are deciding crucial elections.

“Everything Americans value is at stake,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer told fellow Democratic senators on a conference call Saturday, according to a person who was not authorized to publicly discuss the private call and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Mr. Biden is not planning to release a full list of potential court nominees, according to a top aide, because it would further politicize the process. The aide was not authorized to publicly discuss private deliberations and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Mr. Biden's team suggests that the court fight will heighten the focus on issues that were already at stake in the election: health care, environmental protections, gender equity, and abortion.

Health care, in particular, has been a top voter concern this pandemic-year election, Democrats say. They will argue that protections for Americans with preexisting conditions are essentially on the ballot as the Supreme Court will hear the administration's argument to strike down President Barack Obama's health law shortly after the election. The Affordable Care Act includes such protections and the court is expected to render a verdict next year.

On Sunday, Mr. Biden charged that Mr. Trump is seeking to undermine the protections for people with pre-existing conditions under the ACA, as well as its provisions covering preventative care for women. “Millions of Americans are voting because they know their health care hangs in the balance," Mr. Biden said during remarks at Constitution Center in Philadelphia. “In the middle of the worst global health crisis  in living memory, Donald Trump is before the Supreme Court, trying to strip health care coverage away from tens of millions of families.”

Mr. Biden is expected to focus in the weeks ahead on the Democratic fight to prevent a nominee from being confirmed to the court, with a particular emphasis on the effect the court could have on health care and climate change.

“Make it real,” said Hillary Clinton, urging Democrats to take the fight to the polls, in an interview on MSNBC.

Republicans say voters, particularly those the party needs to win back, are motivated by the chance to name a conservative judge – so much so that it could take some states off the map for Democrats. The focus on the nomination fight could help unify such voters around a common issue in an election season with so many distractions, said Mr. Leo of the Federalist Society.

“Going as far back as 2000, poll after poll shows that the Supreme Court is an issue that resonates strongly with Republican and conservative voters, and importantly even with low-propensity voters from those groups,” he said.

Republicans were especially optimistic that the court battle would boost their chances of holding the Senate, particularly in Republican-leaning states such as Montana, Iowa, Kansas, Georgia, and South Carolina where GOP candidates are at risk. Democrats need to pick up three seats to claim the Senate majority if Mr. Biden wins and four if he doesn't.

Key GOP senators who face tough reelection contests in such states where Mr. Trump is popular quickly linked themselves to his push for a swift vote, embracing the prospect of another conservative on the bench. Among them: Martha McSally in Arizona, Thom Tillis in North Carolina, and Lindsey Graham in South Carolina.

Yet other Republicans in more contested battleground states, including Sen. Cory Gardner in Colorado, held back, heeding Mr. McConnell’s advice to keep their “powder dry.” Two Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, spoke out after Justice Ginsburg’s death to object to the speedy pace, saying the Senate should not vote before the election so the candidate elected on Nov. 3 can decide.

As he left the White House for Saturday evening's rally in North Carolina, Mr. Trump signaled his displeasure with Ms. Collins – and a potential warning to other wayward Republicans: “I totally disagree with her,” he said.

Democratic challengers and outside allies seized on what they called “hypocrisy" of Republicans refusing to consider Obama's nominee before the 2016 election, unearthing past statements from many of the same senators now pushing ahead for Mr. Trump.

The Democrats raised more than $91 million in the hours after Justice Ginsburg’s death.

Many Republicans are hopeful the Supreme Court fight will supersede many conservative voters' concerns about Mr. Trump's inconsistent leadership and divisive rhetoric. But voters in key states are already dealing with unprecedented hardships that will not simply disappear in the coming weeks.

Conservative activist Tim Phillips, president of the group Americans for Prosperity, is doubtful that the court fight will change many votes. He spent much of Saturday canvassing suburban neighborhoods around Kansas City as part of his organization's massive push to boost down-ballot Republicans in November.

When conservative activists gathered in the morning, the Supreme Court was a prime topic of conversation that "strengthened their resolve to get out and work," Mr. Phillips said. But once they started knocking on voters' doors, “it didn't even come up.”

“I just think given the magnitude of the crises – plural – facing swing voters, this is just not going to be a crucial factor in their final decision,” Mr. Phillips said.

At the Cambria County Republican Party headquarters in western Pennsylvania, the vacancy wasn't a major topic of conversation as people swung by on Saturday to pick up yard signs and campaign swag.

Lisa Holgash, a Trump supporter, said she would “love it” if Mr. Trump were able to appoint another Supreme Court Justice. But she said she was concerned about the idea of Republicans pushing through a nominee so quickly ahead of the election, especially after Republicans denied Obama a final pick in his last year.

“It’s not that far now to the election,” she said. “I don’t think it should be rushed."

This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writers Alexandra Jaffe in Wilmington, Delaware; Jill Colvin in Johnstown, Pennsylvania; and Darlene Superville in Washington contributed to this report.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why GOP hopes filling a Supreme Court seat will sway voters
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today