GOP Eyes Supreme Court as Senate Control Slips Away

Senate Race Tightens, Democrats Gain Ground

The race for control of the U.S. Senate is becoming increasingly competitive, with Democrats seeing improved chances of flipping the chamber in the upcoming elections. Just weeks ago, this seemed unlikely, but the influential Cook Political Report has shifted four key races toward the Democratic party. This shift indicates a narrowing gap between Republicans and Democrats as the midterm elections approach.

The Georgia Senate race, featuring incumbent John Ossoff, is now leaning Democrat. Similarly, North Carolina, where former Governor Roy Cooper is running, has also moved into the Democrat-leaning column.

Ohio’s race, with three-term Senator Sherrod Brown likely to be the Democratic nominee, is now considered a toss-up. Even Nebraska, traditionally a solid Republican state, has shifted from solid Republican to likely Republican, a small but significant change.

Republicans Focus on Supreme Court Vacancies

Recognizing the tightening Senate race and potential public weariness with Donald Trump, Republicans are reportedly shifting their focus to the Supreme Court. The goal appears to be securing their conservative agenda before the election results are finalized. With Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, both in their late 70s and reliably conservative, potentially nearing the end of their time on the bench, Republicans see an opportunity.

Both Thomas and Alito are key members of the current 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court. This majority has significantly influenced laws concerning abortion, gun rights, and executive power. The calculation for Republicans is that if either justice retires while Donald Trump is president and Republicans control the Senate, Trump could appoint younger, more conservative justices who could serve for decades.

Confirmation Process and Potential Nominees

Supreme Court confirmations require only a simple majority in the Senate. If Republicans maintain control, they could confirm a new justice without any Democratic support.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley has stated his committee is prepared to process nominations quickly. He has even suggested potential replacements, including Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz, if Justice Alito were to retire.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has also indicated readiness to confirm a replacement before the midterm elections if an opportunity arises. Legal analyst Elie Mystal suggested in The Nation that Thune’s remarks might be aimed at Justice Alito himself, encouraging him to retire while a Republican Senate can confirm a successor. This suggests a strategic effort to ensure conservative judicial continuity.

“This might be Thune’s way of telling the justice, buddy, leave while you still can.”

— Elie Mystal, Legal Analyst

Advocacy Groups and Trump’s Stance

An advocacy group called Demand Justice is launching a multimillion-dollar campaign to oppose any potential Trump Supreme Court nominee. They warn that Trump could have the chance to appoint two justices before his term ends. Trump himself has alluded to this possibility, referencing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s decision not to retire under President Obama.

During his first term, Trump appointed Amy Coney Barrett after Ginsburg’s death. Trump’s comments suggest a belief that justices should retire strategically to ensure their preferred political ideology is maintained on the court. He noted that Justice Ginsburg’s decision to stay on the bench led to his appointment of Barrett, implying a strategic lesson for current justices.

Justice Thomas’s Controversial Speech

Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas recently delivered a speech at the University of Texas that has drawn significant criticism. Ostensibly honoring the Declaration of Independence, the speech instead presented a view that scholars described as misinformed or deliberately misleading. Thomas argued that progressivism is incompatible with the Declaration of Independence and linked it to authoritarian figures like Stalin and Hitler.

He also criticized colleagues who seek compromise on the court, labeling them as mere institutionalists and pragmatists. This perspective was strongly challenged by former federal judge J.

Michael Luttig, a respected conservative legal voice. Luttig called Thomas’s speech an “explanation and justification for Donald Trump and the MAGA movement” and even a potential “but-for cause of January 6th, 2021.”.

Historical Revisionism and Criticism

Historians and legal scholars quickly responded to Justice Thomas’s claims. They pointed out that the progressive era was an organic American response to issues like child labor and corporate monopolies, supported by both Republicans and Democrats. The idea that progressivism is a foreign import linked to 20th-century atrocities was widely refuted.

Luttig argued that Thomas’s version of history weaponizes facts, conflating American progressivism with European authoritarianism. He stated that it is the MAGA conservatives, led by Donald Trump, who are increasingly rejecting the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, not American progressives. Luttig’s critique suggests a fundamental disagreement on who currently upholds American founding principles.

Irony and Donor Ties

In a striking moment of irony, Justice Thomas concluded his speech by thanking conservative megadonor Harlan Crow. ProPublica investigations have revealed that Crow has provided Thomas with luxury vacations and private travel for years. This occurred immediately after Thomas spoke about moral corruption and ideological seduction, leading to questions about cronyism.

The juxtaposition of Thomas’s speech on integrity with his acknowledgment of Crow’s significant financial support has raised eyebrows. It prompts a re-evaluation of what Justice Thomas might consider fidelity to the Declaration of Independence, suggesting it could be perceived by some as simply cronyism.

Looking Ahead

As the November elections approach, the focus remains on the control of the Senate and its implications for judicial appointments. The potential for Supreme Court vacancies, coupled with the shifting political landscape, sets the stage for intense debate and strategic maneuvering in the coming months.

Source: Control of the Senate is in play. Now, the GOP seems to be shifting focus to the Supreme Court (YouTube)