As the country continues its quest for new justices, many Americans are wondering how to replace a Supreme Court justice. The vacancy was created by the Obama administration and is now the most frequent political cause for presidential election-related uncertainty. Historically, the number of justices on the court fluctuated regularly during the first century of the US, but has remained stable at nine since the 1860s. Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to increase the court’s size to 15 justices, and several Democrats have advocated for a larger Supreme Court in the past. However, some Democrats, including Joe Biden, have opposed this idea. The vacancy usually inspires a larger Republican vote than a Democratic one, because the court’s majority is made up of Republican-appointed justices.
Ketanji Brown Jackson
Ketanji Brown Jackson was confirmed as the Supreme Court’s nominee for replacement of retiring Justice Stephen Breyer in a 53-47 vote in the Senate on Friday. She would be the first African-American woman on the court, and the first public defender. Jackson attended Harvard University and the law school. Her education involved facing questions about her race in an elite circle. After earning her law degree, she held three clerkships for federal judges, including one with Justice Stephen Breyer.
In addition to being a federal public defender, Jackson also has a background in corporate law. No current justice has a similar background. His career as a public defender has provided him with extensive experience in defending vulnerable members of society. He also has a family member who was caught up in the criminal justice system. While critics of Jackson’s judicial record are divided, her diverse background makes her a worthy replacement.
Republican Senate leaders have tried to spin Jackson as a radical left-wing political hack, but the American Bar Association unanimously awarded him its “Well Qualified” designation. That is, unless Republicans are willing to accept her as a conservative fellow traveler. Jackson is now expected to replace Breyer in June, after he steps down. If confirmed, she will become the first African-American woman on the Supreme Court.
Despite the partisanship, the nomination of Brown Jackson is widely supported. His experience on the D.C. Circuit shows that he can be a judicial consensus-builder. He has bipartisan support in the Senate and he is committed to following the law. Despite his conservative past, Brown Jackson can be a balancing force. If confirmed, his nomination would help restore the liberal wing of the Supreme Court.
A recent Supreme Court battle has demonstrated the importance of elections. The president who nominated Kavanaugh won the electoral vote, but did not win the popular vote. The Supreme Court appoints justices by unanimous consent, which means that the president needs to win both the popular and electoral votes for the nominee to become a justice. Additionally, the presidential electorate does not have the same electoral power as smaller states, so in the event that Kavanaugh is nominated by the President of the United States, he will need to win the Senate.
While Republicans maintain a majority in the Senate, most Democrats oppose Kavanaugh, making the confirmation process more difficult. While most Republicans will vote to confirm Kavanaugh, some Democrats are undecided. Ted Cruz and Susan Collins, both Republican senators from Texas and Maine, are the two most likely to vote against him, but they are a majority of the Senate, which is important because they will have the power to confirm Kavanaugh.
The nomination of Brett Kavanaugh has been criticized by many social conservatives. While he’s a conservative, social conservatives fear that he won’t be hardline enough. His dissent in an EPA case signaled the death of conservative justice Antonin Scalia. After the Supreme Court overturned the D.C. Circuit’s decision, conservatives have become increasingly skeptical of Kavanaugh.
Although Kavanaugh has a distinguished judicial record, his stance on the CFPB is controversial. He has argued that the CFPB is unconstitutional and that the president cannot remove its director without cause. This is a clear case of executive authority absolutism. Even more disturbing is that Kavanaugh also has a long list of other controversial positions. In fact, his nomination has been sabotaged by conservatives, who consider judicial vacancies a political opportunity to further their agenda.
Democrat nominees have been squabbling for the supreme court seat for the past several months, and a majority of senators are now calling for Antonin Scalia to be nominated. Despite the fact that the judicial conservative was the most influential in history, Obama hasn’t given the right nominee the full backing of the Republican party. Despite this, conservatives and Democrats should support him if he is chosen.
However, the choice of a successor for Antonin Scalia will be even more polarizing than the last few nomination fights. The nomination of a liberal jurist could tip the court too far in a left-leaning direction, and the current five conservatives could be replaced by two or more liberals. This could mean a series of 4-to-4 votes, and an increasingly unbalanced court.
While the majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller shows the progressives’ preference, the Republican nominee isn’t exactly on the right side. The left’s nominee, Jason Mazzone, has a strong track record of supporting gay rights and equal marriage, but he was not in favor of the right to abortion. The Democrats’ supporters have said that the Supreme Court should be left up to the voters, but a majority of Senate Republicans disagree.
The Republicans have also criticized the president’s choice of a conservative. While Obama has made clear that he will nominate a conservative senator, it seems unlikely that the Republican Senate would approve a conservative nominee. There is no consensus on a conservative nominee, but it is likely that the president will choose a moderate senator who is not a “socialist” or “liberal” on the court.
Those seeking a replacement for the late Thurgood Marshall should consider Justice Clarence Thomas. Thomas served on the Supreme Court for a decade, beginning in 1991. He is an African American and was the first to be nominated by President Bush. His conservative views gave the court a conservative cast and he is one of the most influential figures in the U.S. justice system. But while Thomas’ record is impressive, he has some questions to answer before he takes the seat.
One of the key questions on whether or not to impeach Thomas is whether he would support a woman over a man. He is the favorite of conservative Republicans and is widely known for his conservative activism. The Democrat’s primary motivation for calling for Thomas’ impeachment is the fact that he is married to a woman who is known for her conservative activism. Thomas was a leader of the tea party movement during the early years of the Obama administration. In addition, she founded a lobbying firm called Liberty Consulting in 2009 and an advocacy group called Liberty Central.
The absence of Justice Thomas from arguments comes amid the confirmation hearings of Ketanji Brown Jackson, the successor of Stephen Breyer. Jackson was nominated by President Joe Biden and will take over from Breyer. The current term of Justice Stephen Breyer is set to end in the summer, and he plans to retire after that. However, questions remain about whether Thomas has been vaccinated against COVID-19 and has received a booster shot.
Despite the aforementioned issues, Thomas’ confirmation as a replacement for Clarence Hill remains a controversial choice. Anita Hill, who worked for Thomas at the Department of Education and the EEOC, accused him of sexual harassment. Thomas denied the allegations and blamed the Senate’s sexual harassment committee of being a “high-tech lynching.” Ultimately, the deeply divided Senate confirmed Thomas’ nomination by 52-48.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
There are a few signs that a woman could replace a high-ranking Supreme Court Justice. One of these signs is the fact that Ginsburg has the credentials to do the job. She attended Harvard Law School, served on its law review, and graduated in 1959 with top honors. Her father was a merchant, and her mother died of meningitis at age six. Ginsburg’s education was solid. She excelled in public schools, including as a baton twirler. Her mother died of cancer the day before she graduated from high school.
While the death of the 89-year-old law professor sets the stage for a high-profile Senate race to fill her vacant seat, the nomination process for a replacement is far from certain. The president, who is expected to move swiftly to fill the seat, has already outlined a list of 40 potential candidates. However, conservatives may face challenges, given the upcoming election and the slim Republican majority in the Senate.
When she joined the Supreme Court, Ginsburg was already a prominent advocate for women’s rights. The majority opinion of United States v. Virginia, a case in which women could not be denied admission to the Virginia Military Institute, was her first. Her style of advocacy matched her style at the ACLU, where she focused on tackling specific areas of discrimination and violations of women’s rights.
If the current Supreme Court nominee cannot fulfill the nomination process, Ginsburg’s legacy should be preserved. Ginsburg fought for equality, and used her judicial office wisely. Her legacy will be important during a time of backlash against human rights, growing pressures on the rules-based international order, and deepening inequalities. The death of Justice Ginsburg would also mean a need to address the Covid-19 pandemic.