The tricky timing of naming O’Connor’s successor

On July 1, Sandra Day O’Connor surprised a lot of people by announcing her retirement from the Supreme Court. On July 2, Bush said he’d pick his replacement quickly.

Based on this White House’s modus operandi, this was expected. When more than half of his cabinet needed to be replaced after last November’s election, Bush rarely allowed the vacancy to go a day or two without immediately nominating a replacement. It was supposed to be the same here. Bush aides gave word that the president would name a nominee within 48 to 72 hours of a vacancy to keep the left from filling the rhetorical void.

It obviously hasn’t worked out that way. At first, we’d get a nominee almost immediately. Then, we learned we’d have to wait until August. Today, the Bush gang has shifted gears again, indicating that a nominee could be announced this week.

President Bush, accelerating his search for a new Supreme Court justice, appears to have narrowed his list of candidates to no more than a few finalists and could announce his decision in the next few days, Republican strategists informed about White House plans said yesterday.

Advisers to Bush had anticipated an announcement closer to the end of the month, but the White House signaled allies over the weekend to be prepared for a nomination this week, according to the strategists, who asked not to be named because the process remains officially confidential.

Why all the confusion and shifting plans?

I actually understood the strategy of waiting until August. The delay allowed every group with an agenda to start fighting, but with no nominee out there, everyone’s been shadow boxing. No nominee means no specific attacks.

Indeed, Bush hinted over the weekend that he prefers a shorter nomination process.

“The experiences of the two justices nominated by President Clinton provide useful examples of fair treatment and a reasonable timetable for Senate action. In 1993, the Senate voted on and confirmed Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court 42 days after President Clinton submitted her nomination. And despite the significant philosophical differences many senators had with Justice Ginsburg, she received 96 votes in favor of confirmation.

“The following year, Justice Stephen Breyer was confirmed 73 days after his nomination was submitted, with 87 votes in his favor.”

It’s worth noting that Bush was playing numbers games here. If we count from the announcement of the nomination, Ginsburg’s confirmation took 50 days (not 42), Breyer’s took 77 (not 73), and other recent nominees have taken much longer, including Scalia (92), Rehnquist (92), Thomas (106), and Bork (114).

Still, the point’s the same — Bush wants a truncated process that will push the Senate to act quickly before Dems can ask too many pertinent questions.

But if this makes sense, and it does, then why suddenly shift again and announce a nominee this week? This is pure speculation, but I have to assume this has everything to do with Karl Rove’s current “situation.” The Plame Game scandal isn’t going away, the questions are getting trickier, and Mehlman is running out of unpersuasive lies.

A Supreme Court nominee knocks Rove off the front page immediately, and forces the left to start shifting its attention elsewhere. If the White House waits until August to name O’Connor’s replacement, that leads to a few more weeks of all Rove, all the time. If the announcement is this week, the political world’s attention is divided and Rove will take a little less heat.

Again, it’s just conjecture on my part, but it seems to make sense, doesn’t it?

Maybe after Kerik, they’re doing actual background checks…

  • A Supreme Court nominee knocks Rove off the front page immediately, and forces the left to start shifting its attention elsewhere.

    Can’t we get ahead of this then? First we state this belief — The GOP wants us to forget about National Security and deal with the fact that the W administration is not working with the Senate to nominate a judge that the vast majority of the Senate can approve (unlike Clinton and Bush Sr.)–and repeat it everytime we get a chance. Then, we use the DNC, especially Dean, to focus on PlameGate, while Reid and the other Dem Senators focus on the nomination. The Senators shouldn’t be talking about PlameGate, except in response to direct questions, until the Grand Jury/Special Prosecution wraps up in October. Yet there is no reason why Dean, Clark and other Dems *not* in the senate, shouldn’t focus on it.

  • Edo-

    Great point, but who’s “we” and how? (And not “how do we do this,” but “how do we get Dem leadership to do this”)

  • It may buy them a few days, but not many. There will be a lull in between when the announcement of the nomination and the hearings that can be filled by more Plame game stories, and the choice will soon be old news to the reporters who cover the WH anyway, so they can go back to badgering Scotty.

  • Eadie,

    who (supreme court nominee): Dem leadership in the Senate: Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Diana Feinstein, Patrick Leahy, Russ Feingold, Charles Shumer

    who (PlameGate): Dem leadership not in the Senate: Howard Dean, General Wes Clark (definately him), the Dem co-chair of the 9-11 investigation committee (the name escapes me), Nancy Pelosi, Robert Wexler, Tom Lantos (ranking Dem on House Foreign Relations committee)

    that’s who I was thinking.

    How? By convincing Mr. Carpetbagger who is the closest thing I have to someone involved in national politics. Oh now, Mr. Carpetbagger no demuring on us now!

  • Sure seems plausible. I guess we’ll see if the Dem’s can walk and chew gum at the same time. More than likely, the strategy will work b/c whoever the nominee is, the attacks will come swift and the discussion will overtake all else. Well, that is until idictments, if any, are handed down.

  • Oh now, Mr. Carpetbagger no demuring on us now!

    Demur? Me? Never!

    Believe me, all the party leaders are well aware of the situation. Some of the dynamic will be shaped by Bush’s nominee — the more radical the would-be justice, the busier Dems will be in trying to stop him or her — but Dems are committed to both. Edo’s division of labor suggestion sounds about right.

    Helping matters is the new ABC News poll about Rove, which I’ll delve into in more detail tomorrow.

  • Demur? Me? Never!

    and thus the reason why my faith in The Carpetbagger Report is justified. ;->

  • lol all around. Go get ’em, and remember me when i run for office. I won’t be making our current leaders’ mistakes.

  • Auuchhhh… The sooner, the better with the damn nominee. Fitzgerald is an honorable Conservative, and he aint paid too much attention to politics so far. If Bush makes his move now, sure, it will knock Rove & Co. off of the headlines for a while, but they will all be back in a few months when the indictments roll around (And does anyone really believe that Fitzgerald, with about as upstanding a history as possible, would have pursued this one to the Supreme Court (just for a damn witness!), if he didn’t believe there was something REAL at the end of it? This guy doesn’t shadow-box. He plays for keeps).

  • Comments are closed.