Let the people speak
Why the U.S. Senate should delay its vote on the Supreme Court seat until after election.
President Donald Trump had every right to nominate U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death.
The U.S. Senate is within its rights to consider Barrett, who has been deemed “well-qualified” by the American Bar Association, the group’s highest rating, and came across in her testimony as brilliant, thoughtful and well-tempered.
But when it comes to whether to confirm Barrett as the next justice, senators of both parties should delay a decision until after the Nov. 3 election.
This isn’t about Barrett or Senate prerogatives or presidential powers. It is about the good of a nation that has been torn apart by partisan political maneuvering and is even now in the process of choosing a president and a Congress that will be sworn into office in just 96 days.
As we’ve said before, ramming through a Supreme Court nomination, the latest ever considered in a presidential election year, will only further damage our nation’s democratic mores and values that have been trampled by the president and a complicit Republican Party.
The president has a terrible track record of building trust in our institutions, or faith in his judgment. He continues to claim the election is “rigged,” and has refused to commit to leaving if he loses. He has weakened the U.S. Post Office just when its services are needed more than ever to handle a surge in mail-in voting. And he has spent the past week calling on the Department of Justice to investigate and even arrest his political opponents.
Against that backdrop, the Senate should understand that millions of Americans will see a rush to name Barrett to the court, so close to Election Day and with such a profound impact on its ideological balance, as one more assault on the trust and traditions that have sustained us for almost 250 years.
A decision to postpone a vote until after the election is the only way the Senate can ensure that the appointment is accepted as legitimate by the whole country. After all, Senate leaders were committed in 2016 “to giving the American people a voice” in the Supreme Court nominee, and they should now prove that they actually have principles and delay a vote until the people have spoken.
A delay is even more appropriate given how Barrett would tip the balance on a court that’s supposed to reflect Americans’ attitudes and beliefs about the law. While the popular vote in 2008, 2012 and 2016 suggests Americans are pretty well split ideologically, and likely even lean centerleft, Barrett’s confirmation would bring the number of conservatives to six while liberals number three.
If Trump had nominated someone more moderate, as Obama did when he put forth the centrist Judge Merrick Garland, approving a nominee now might make sense. But Trump is attempting to replace one of the most liberal justices with someone who will be one of the most conservative.
The court has leaned right for years, but moderate swing votes have kept its decisions from breaking down entirely along ideological lines. The role of swing voters on the court, such as Chief Justice John Roberts of late and Anthony Kennedy before him, will shrink if Barrett is confirmed as a sixth conservative vote.
The stakes are especially high as the court considers cases involving the Affordable Care Act, Roe v. Wade, same-sex marriage, immigration and climate change, issues that spark strong reactions from the extremes on the left and right but produce more complicated and nuanced positions from the overwhelming majority of Americans in the mainstream.
Barrett’s positions and past rulings on issues regarding health care, abortion, separation of church and state, and LGBTQ rights raise serious issues for the editorial board. The pace and format of the expedited hearings, unfortunately, provided few answers to how she might rule as a Supreme Court justice.
Barrett remained mum even on matters of urgent concern, including the court’s role in safeguarding the integrity of the election amid Trump saying repeatedly that he wants his choice on the bench in time to rule on any challenges to the outcome.
“I think this will end up in the Supreme Court, and I think it’s very important that we have nine justices,” Trump told reporters after discussing the election with a group of Republican state attorneys general.
Barrett even declined to answer basic questions on whether an American president should commit to the “peaceful transfer of power.”
The president’s actions have put the integrity of Barrett and the entire court in question. That’s not what America needs.
If voters choose to keep Trump in the White House and the GOP in control of the Senate, then getting Barrett approved by the end of the year shouldn’t be a problem. If not, the will of the people — more than 15 million of whom have already cast their ballots — will be honored.
The Senate has completed its hearings on her nomination. Now it must delay a vote until the people weigh in. If leaders insist on calling the vote, senators of conscience should vote no.