Chicago Tribune (Sunday)

Why the GOP may wait to fill the Supreme Court vacancy

- Steve Chapman Steve Chapman, a member of the Tribune Editorial Board, blogs at www.chicagotri­bune.com/chapman. schapman@chicagotri­bune.com Twitter @SteveChapm­an13

The death of Supreme Court Justice and liberal titan Ruth Bader Ginsburg gives Republican­s the chance to do the right thing. For a president up for reelection in just six weeks, the right thing to do would be to hold off until the people have had their say. The right course for Republican senators, who refused to even hold a hearing for Barack Obama’s nominee when Antonin Scalia died nine months before the 2016 presidenti­al election, would be to decline a vote on any nominee before Election Day.

At the moment, right-wing commentato­rs were salivating at the prospect of solidifyin­g beyond all doubt conservati­ve control of the court. But they may be disappoint­ed.

No one expects Trump or all 53 GOP senators to do anything merely because it is wise, principled or respectful of democratic norms. But maybe they’ll do the right thing to protect their own political interests.

It’s widely assumed that the president will soon announce a nominee and urge quick Senate action. But if Trump and his advisers are focused on his reelection, the shrewd choice would be to do the opposite — telling the public that now would be an inappropri­ate moment to send a name to the Senate. Trump could say instead: “On Nov. 3, the American people will vote. Until then, I will not address the Supreme Court vacancy.”

What would he gain from this option? First, he would avoid a ferocious battle in the Senate that would most likely jeopardize several incumbent Republican­s who are running this year. Second, he would avoid branding himself and his party as the rankest of hypocrites. Instead, he would look almost statesmanl­ike.

He would also give his supporters

— and particular­ly anti-abortion voters — a powerful motive to turn out on Election Day. At the same time, though, Trump would avoid the risk of needlessly alienating those suburban women who are still undecided. The people who desperatel­y want another conservati­ve on the court are already voting for him. The ones on the fence, by contrast, are more likely to be alarmed by the idea of overturnin­g Roe v. Wade.

Some Republican senators must be praying to be spared a vote before Election Day. Their opponents, after all, would not have to attack Trump’s nominee. They would have the middle option of saying, “What’s the rush? Why not let the people speak first?” Given how Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell quashed Merrick Garland’s nomination, leaving a vacancy unfilled for 14 months, those questions would be brutally hard to answer.

Trump also has to consider the possibilit­y of a humiliatin­g rejection of his nominee, something that would require the defection of just four GOP senators. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska had already said she would not vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee before Inaugurati­on Day. Can Trump count on Mitt Romney, who voted to remove him from office?

Several GOP incumbents on the ballot this year are trailing in the polls, including Susan Collins of Maine, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Martha McSally of Arizona and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. If Trump submits a nomination, will they really want to shackle themselves to a president who appears to be headed for defeat?

It’s not impossible that Trump will make his choice and the Senate will rush to approve it. But hard political realities may just block the way.

 ?? JOSE LUIS MAGANA/GETTY-AFP ?? A child places a flower outside the Supreme Court in Washington on Saturday after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
JOSE LUIS MAGANA/GETTY-AFP A child places a flower outside the Supreme Court in Washington on Saturday after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States