Watching John Roberts’ Supreme Court nomination unfold has been vaguely surreal. Republican moderates who were supposed to be skeptical of any nominee hostile to Roe v Wade have been silent. Hard-line conservatives who heard grumbling from the base about Roberts’ dubious commitment to a right-wing agenda bit their tongue. Dems who had geared up for the Political Fight of the Century put their guns back in their holsters. It’s been like watching several cars avoid a crash in slow motion.
Of course, the dynamics changed after Rehnquist died, and Roberts became the nominee for Chief Justice. Roberts was cruising anyway, but when everyone saw this as a conservative replacing a conservative, it suddenly got less interesting.
Rumor has it that Bush will nominate O’Connor’s replacement as early as this week. By all indications, it’s going to produce a far more interesting political environment — particularly among Republicans.
Now, both socially conservative and more liberal Republican senators say they may vote against confirmation of the next nominee if the pick leans too far to the left or the right on prominent issues like abortion rights.
Any Republican defection could provide cover for Democrats who want to oppose confirmation, protecting them politically in Republican-leaning states. Democrats have vowed to dig in for a tough fight over the nominee to succeed Justice Sandra Day O’Connor because she was a pivotal swing vote on the court.
“It is going to be different,” said Senator Lincoln Chafee, Republican of Rhode Island, who is socially liberal and has said he will vote to confirm Judge Roberts.
How different? Well, Chafee and Olympia Snowe, who raised nary a doubt about Roberts, both told the NYT that they’d be willing to vote against the next nominee. For Dems hoping for a vigorous process, that’s a promising start.
On the polar opposite side of the GOP spectrum, we’re hearing similar rhetoric from a different perspective.
On the conservative side of the party, Mr. Brownback and Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, another member of the Judiciary Committee, devoted much of their time for questioning Judge Roberts to delivering messages to the White House about the importance of overturning precedents supporting abortion rights.
In an interview last week, Mr. Brownback said he would vote against a nominee who was not “solid and known” on cultural issues like abortion, same-sex marriage and religion in public life.
“If the president doesn’t nominate a solid nominee, that is going counter to what he campaigned on,” Mr. Brownback said. And if such a nominee “involves a contentious battle, then let it be.”
This is hardly a pleasant position for the White House. If the nominee isn’t a fire-breathing extremist, Brownback and Coburn are prepared to ignore party loyalty, raise a serious fuss, and consider voting against. If the nominee is a right-wing nut, Chafee and Snowe — among others? — will join with Dems in opposition.
Bush threaded the needle with Roberts. It’s unlikely to happen again.