Hearings bigstage, big risk for Harris
Democratic VP candidate may get nearly as much attention as Barrett during proceedings
WASHINGTON >> Just seconds into the Supreme Court confirmation hearing of Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, Sen. Chuck Grassley, then the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was interrupted by a sharp demand to be recognized from far down the Democratic side of the dais.
“We cannot move forward, Mr. Chairman, with this hearing,” Kamala Harris of California, the most junior Democrat on the panel, insisted after Grassley tried repeatedly to silence her, first by ignoring her and then by declaring her out of order.
Harris’ dogged effort to delay the hearing failed. Kavanaugh went on to be confirmed after a searing fight, featuring sharp questioning by the senator.
Today, she remains the lowest-ranking Democrat on the panel. But when the Judiciary Committee convenes Monday to consider the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, Harris will take on an outsize role in the proceedings as the party’s vice-presidential nominee. Almost as many eyes will be on her as on Barrett.
Her seat on the panel will provide Harris a prominent platform to frame the stakes of Barrett’s nomination for voters and amplify the message that Joe Biden, the party standard-bearer, is pressing in the final weeks of the campaign. But it will also require her to strike a delicate balance — one that she
has been forced to calibrate ever since she joined Biden on the Democratic ticket — between being on the attack and coming across as sincere and broadly appealing.
Colleagues say that Harris’ capable turn at the debate last week against Vice President Mike Pence made it clear that she will have done her homework and be unafraid to challenge Barrett, arguing that she poses a grave threat to the Affordable Care Act and abortion rights. But no one expects Harris to take any kind of confrontational risk that could backfire and alienate voters, especially given Biden’s steady lead in the polls over President Donald Trump.
“Kamala Harris has already shown herself to be well grounded and well prepared, but also able to ask pointed questions,” said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., a fellow member of the panel. “She will help make clear to the American people the enormous consequences of Judge Barrett being confirmed to the Supreme Court.”
Harris is not the only member of the committee in the middle of a contentious race. Four Republicans — Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Joni Ernst of Iowa and John Cornyn of Texas — also face the voters in a matter of days. They hope to use the hearings to bolster Republican enthusiasm while avoiding any political missteps.
Graham, the committee chairman in an unexpectedly difficult fight back home, is in a particularly visible role. He will be under fire for proceeding with a hearing that Democrats consider out of bounds given its proximity to the election.
In the debate, Harris sought to drive home the point that Republicans were rushing the nomination against historical precedent, noting that Abraham Lincoln in 1864 deferred his opportunity to fill a Supreme Court seat that came open only weeks before the election.
“Joe and I are very clear,” she said, “the American people are voting right now, and it should be their decision about who will serve on this most important body for a lifetime.”
Harris had planned to attend the hearings in person unless health and safety considerations arose. But Sunday, she announced that she would instead monitor the proceedings from her Senate office, reinforcing the Democratic argument that Republicans are acting irresponsibly in pushing forward with the hearings even as the coronavirus has infected members of the committee.
Still, Republicans expect Harris to be among the most outspoken against the nomination, given her prominent political role and their memory of her participation in Kavanaugh’s hearing and other Senate confirmation battles.
After her selection by Biden, Trump accused her of being “extraordinarily nasty” to Kavanaugh in her questioning. In the debate, Pence recalled that Harris had questioned another judicial nominee’s views because he belonged to the Knights of Columbus, an organization for Catholic men.
In a conference call with reporters this month, Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, suggested that Harris would be under pressure to take on Barrett at the hearings.
“I don’t think we will see less of Kamala,” he said. “I think we will see more of Kamala as it relates to her interaction.”
Democrats say the criticism from Republicans reflects their concern about the abilities of Harris, a former prosecutor, when grilling witnesses.
“I think this is an opportunity for her, because she is just so great as a questioner and as a force for justice,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, another Democrat on the panel.
In the Kavanaugh hearings, Harris quizzed the nominee on a variety of topics such as abortion rights and Trump’s comment about a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 that there was “blame on both sides.”
“Do you, sir, believe there was blame on both sides?” she asked with the direct accusatory style of a prosecutor. Kavanaugh refused to answer, saying judges needed to “stay out of commenting on current events.”
Probably her most noted line of inquiry, though, came up empty after a nearly 8-minute exchange with Kavanaugh over whether he had discussed the special counsel investigation of Trump and Russia with any lawyers at a firm founded by a lawyer for the president.
“Be sure about your answer, sir,” Harris warned the nominee in a tone that intimated she knew the answer and it was not good for Kavanaugh.
He responded that he was unsure, since Harris would not provide a name.
After some investigation, Kavanaugh responded the next day that he had not discussed the inquiry with anyone at the firm. The issue died, and Republicans scoffed that Harris looked foolish.
“I hope the Democrats have learned from the antics of 2018 that they looked pretty bad, and some of the most aggressive questioning came from Harris, and some of the things that lacked any credibility whatsoever came from her,” said Grassley, R-Iowa, who remains on the committee but is no longer chairman.
Democrats on the panel said they anticipated that Harris would join them in trying to use the hearings to showcase policy divisions with Republicans over the health care law, emphasizing the possibility that Barrett could join four other conservatives on the court in overturning it. They said they expected that Harris would consult with Biden, a longtime former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, about how to approach the hearing.
They also noted that she had her hands full running for vice president and would most likely have to dip in and out of the proceedings.
“She is,” Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii said, “a tad busy.”