Who will Trump nominate for SCOTUS, and can he get it done by election day?

It's going to be Ted Cruz, because that's who we want
It’s going to be Ted Cruz, because that’s who Republican voters want

So, there’s a vacancy on the Supreme Court, and since we don’t have a wuss in the Oval office, we’re going to get a nominee and a vote on that nominee in the Senate. The process of nominating someone to the Supreme Court requires the president to nominate, and the Senate to advise and consent. The Republicans control both the White House and the Senate, and there is time to get it done.

The Federalist explains that short-time nominations have happened before:

Three Supreme Court Justices, including Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away on Friday due to complications of metastatic pancreatic cancer, were confirmed by the Senate within 45 days of their formal nomination date.

According to Senate records, Justices Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, and Sandra Day O’Connor were all confirmed in a short period of time. Stevens’s confirmation in 1975 took 19 days, O’Connor’s confirmation in 1981 took 33 days, and Ginsburg’s confirmation in 1993 took 42 days.

[…]Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced Trump’s nomination would receive a vote on the floor, adding the Senate will keep their promise to “support [Trump’s] agenda “particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary.”

“President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate,” he stated.

I love this news story, because if there is anything that can get the conservative base out, it’s a conservative Supreme Court nominee. We care about judges, and now everyone is going to be reminded why we elected Trump in the first place. It’s hard to get a perfect nominee through the Senate when we have a few moderate senators who won’t support a social conservative. We need 50 votes for a real social conservative, and we don’t have that. There are at least 3 moderates: Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins, and Mitt Romney. Murkowski and Collins have already come out and said they don’t want to vote on a judge until after the election. Still, we might be able to get someone right of center in there who would give us most of what we want, and get him or her through with a few votes from moderate Democrats.

Now watch this 2 minute video:

Here’s a summary for those who can’t watch:

Trump brought up Cruz in the context of speaking about Cruz’s last Senate victory. “I helped a lot too. I was with Ted all the way, and I think Ted appreciated it. Even said I’m putting Ted Cruz as one of the people for the Supreme Court,” Trump said. He continued:

You know why I did it, because I wanted to make sure I had somebody on the list of about 45 unbelievable people, the smartest, the best, the absolute crème de la crème, the best minds in the country, conservative, they believe in the Constitution. Little things like that. But I said I have to add somebody that we’re going to make sure we could get approved. The only one I could think of was Ted, because  He’s going to get 50 Republican votes and 50 Democratic votes. They’ll do anything to get him out of the Senate. But I joke when I say that to Ted, and I say that all the time, Ted’s only one I know that will get 100 votes in the Senate.

Trump added of Cruz: “He’s a great guy; he’s a brilliant guy.”

I think it would be a smart move for Trump to drive turnout by having a fight over someone the base really wants – like Ted Cruz. Not only is Ted Cruz brilliant and conservative, but his replacement in the Senate would be picked by Greg Abbott, the conservative governor of Texas.

Ted Cruz is Hispanic, and that is a very useful thing to put in the news 45 days out from an election. It reminds Hispanic voters that Hispanics can be conservative, and fit into the Republican party. We need to counter the narrative that the Democrats spread about racism from the right. It’s ironic, because people like Ted Cruz and Thomas Sowell are our best conservatives.

18 thoughts on “Who will Trump nominate for SCOTUS, and can he get it done by election day?”

  1. And that’s the First Monday in October. We wouldn’t want the new Associate Justice to miss a single day of work. And we will need them to protect our election.

    Like

        1. I haven’t looked over the list but someone NOT from the Swamp or Establishment and easy on the eyes. (Male or Female, I have enough stomach discomfort (IBS) with RGB, Pelosi, and Leftism makes people ugly.) And maybe from the South or Midwest.
          I’ve been using Revolver.news since leaving Drudge months ago and spotted this article:
          Revolver Exclusive: Disloyal Elements in Trump Administration Plan to Sneak Birthright Citizenship Activist onto Supreme Court
          September 17, 2020
          https://www.revolver.news/2020/09/judge-ho-birthright-citizenship-activist-supreme-court/
          I’m thinking Trump should nominate #3 or #4 and let the Democrats, MSM, Leftists and TDS sufferers rage for about a week and then on the day of her funeral withdraw that one and nominate his first choice.
          Never apologize. Your friends don’t need it and your enemies won’t believe you anyway. (That’s a paraphrase of some quote.)
          No matter when Trump nominates anyone they will rage. No matter how accommodating the Turtle Mitch tries to be it won’t be good enough.
          Just do it. (Nike) Full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes. Admiral Farragut (a paraphrase, look up the whole quote)

          Like

        2. All six of the women on the list might work. Bade (9th Circuit) and Todd (DC resident already) have those strikes against them.
          All 6 are under 55 some under 40 so they would have decades on the court.
          My biggest concern is to make sure they don’t turn out like Roberts.

          Like

  2. Ginsburg already “died” figuratively and functionally months ago, and should have been forced into retirement due to her incapacity. But TPTB have been postponing this eventuality and stalling for time in an effort to control the sequence of events according to their purposes.

    Lexet has a post covering the same eponymous question. It’s interesting to compare notes.
    https://lexetiustitia.wordpress.com/2020/09/19/rbgs-replacement-barbara-lagoa/

    Like

  3. Check out The Lexet Blog. Looks like they do an extensive analysis of Trump’s list starting with the biological females. Or at least the one with names we usually associate with the female gender. Facetious.

    Like

  4. I’m tempted to say at this point “What difference does it really ultimately make?”

    We can say with near certainty that November 4, 2020 is going to be the date future historians will mark as the start of American Civil War II. We know that neither side is going to concede defeat in this election, and this will touch off a series of events that will inevitably lead to the breakup of the United States of America. Thus one has to question the relevance and importance of the issue of who the justices are of the Supreme Court of a defunct nation. At a minimum the events on the horizon will render most SCOTUS decisions little more than quaint legal opinions, as vast swaths of (what was once) the USA will no longer pay them any heed.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s