Question: If Kavanaugh withdrew on 9/24, could Amy Barrett be confirmed before the midterms?

[Algernon Moncrieff]

I'm thinking "no" but I'd be curious to hear opinions.

I'm supposing Barrett would be the next choice, since she is both just as conservative as Kavanaugh and the sense that her gender would make her a foolproof selection.

[hlthe2b]

1. I'd find it hard to imagine, but RETHUGs would likely try.

The problem for them is that early voting has already begun in some states and others will send out mail ballets next week or the week after (e.g., CO)

[idcdu]

6. When?

When are we getting our ballots?
And what proposition should I vote for? 110 111 112. I gotta figure all of it. 112 is a definite yes.

[hlthe2b]

15. Does your state send out paper ballots? I am speaking to those states that do, like CO

I see you live in Maryland... Folks in the DU Maryland group might be helpful in answering your questions.

Best thing to do is check your county voter registrar's web page (and the state SOS to make sure you are registered)

[idcdu]

16. I actually am in CO

I'm in Denver. My rep is DeGette.

That is why I asked.

What made you think I'm in Maryland? I read everything and have besties in Pikesville.

[hlthe2b]

17. I saw that your fav group was Maryland, so I'd thought you were from there.

Coloradoans who are duly registered should get ballots in the next two weeks. Typically there is a voter "blue" book that will go through all the pros and cons of the various propositions. The CO group here will undoubtedly discuss them when they receive their ballots and can read the background info. There is usually a pretty good discussion.

[idcdu]

20. I look forward to it

Cant wait to see the ballots and figure it out.

Polis, Weiser, Griswold are getting my votes.

[CincyDem]

2. There will be a new nominee the day after (or the afternoon of) Kavanaugh's withdrawal.

It'll be Barrett. She's got all their creds, limited paper trail and they just confirmed her to the Appellate last November. Judiciary did their hearings in September 2017.

Grassley will announce that, because we spent such quality time with judge Barrett only a year ago, we will have an abbreviated hearing schedule. Wouldn't be surprised to see him open hearings first week of October. Limit to a day of questioning, a day of witnesses and a vote...Dems will argue but, in all honesty, we appropriately spent a lot of capital on Kavanaugh and it is objectively hard to argue we don't know about Barrett having just voted a year ago. Nothing's changed and she'll be approved out of committee on a party line vote.

She could go to the full senate by 10/20 or so and Mitch will move heaven and earth to get her a vote. She'll be approved with support from as least Manchin (again) and probably Jones.

So yeah - she won't make it to the first monday in october but she'll be there for the first votes on election day.

IMHO.

[dalton99a]

8. +1. A very likely scenario

[mr_liberal]

19. They could lose Collins and Murkowski though because she is likely to overturn Roe.

Thats why I don't think she was seriously considered in the first place because they don't know if they can get her confirmed. Kavanaugh convinced them (Collins and Murkowski) that he respects precedent and won't overturn Roe.

[CincyDem]

22. Maybe - but I don't think there's a name on "The List" that won't overturn Roe

Some may flat out vote to overturn, most may support substantial constraints so as to effectively overturn.

While I agree that Collins and Murkowski might have issues, I think Barrett is a real problem for Jones and Manchin. Manchin voted in favor of her last year. Jones wasn't there. Interestingly, Kaine also voted in favor.

So I think there's a grey zone of 4-5 names in the middle that could float one way or another.

Whoever it is, you can be damn sure that McConnell will make this next one work. One lost nominee is the nominee's fault. Two lost is the Senate's fault.

Also - you want a fun read, take a look at People of Praise. NYT reported that Barrett was a member of this little group of 3,000 zealots. I think it was referenced in the Appellate hearings but it's likely to get a lot more scrutiny if she's get the nod for SCOTUS.

[Hortensis]

3. Good question, Algernon, and good info, HL and Cincy.

Thanks.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

5. You've got to be thinking that there is discussion of cutting their losses

Trump won't like it, but this week is probably the last chance they have to stop the bleeding.

[Hortensis]

14. Oh, you bet, but still seriously worried they'll carry it off.

The stakes are beyond enormous, after all. They can still put a hard-core conservative on this year, but if they can do that now it could turn the midterms around for them. They must keep control of the senate.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

18. They know if they lose control of the Senate, Merrick Garland doctrine will be applied

The voters will decide in 2020

My opinion: we need a Constitutional change. If it were up to me: Senate has to vote on a nominee within 90 days; 3/5 needed to confirm; justices can serve for a limit of 20 years.

[Hortensis]

26. Remember, they have from now to -- what?

January ?, 2019 -- to confirm a new justice. I saw that the new congress convenes on January 3. No need or chance for a Merrick Garland maneuver before then. Definitely agree the possibility needs to be eliminated legislatively for the future!

Also basically agree with your changes. We might also consider increasing the number of justices, get rid of this too-reliable 5-4 split. And break the pattern of elevating most justices from only one or two eastern circuits.

[brewens]

28. Yup. If holding it open for one year was okay, two years will be just fine as well. They know

that Trump is done appointing any judges if Democrats control the Senate. In that case I would suggest the Democrats be more than generous and tell Trump that if he nominates a moderate straight shooter, he or she will be given a hearing.

[mr_liberal]

4. More conservative.

Kavanagh was not on Trump's original list he was elected with. He was added late last year and I think as a way to convince Kennedy to retire. There are reports that he was suggested by Kennedy. People don't realize it but Kavanaugh is suppose to be a moderate compared to Trumps original list. When he was chosen conservatives were mad at first and called him establishment and a Bushie. Now they've rallied around him since he's come under attack by Democrats.

To be honest the only way stopping him is good is if Democrats can win the senate. Otherwise all getting rid of Kavanaugh will do is lead to an even more conservative nominee.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

7. I thought for sure Barrett would be the pick

A woman who is staunchly anti-abortion in her personal beliefs. I figured that was all they needed to know.

[mr_liberal]

9. I don't think she was ever seriously considered.

They just brought her in as a sop to the religious right so they would think she was considered.

It was always supposed to be Kavanaugh even before Trumps meetings. Kavanaugh is a republican insider and will do what is best for the republican party. Regarding Roe for example that may mean allowing more restrictions but not overturning etc.... Amy Barrett is a wild card, they have no idea what she'll do so I doubt they'd nominate her even if Kavanaugh was rejected. That would also be going back on what Trump promised Kennedy (to not nominate someone far right) if that promise/deal did occur.

[honest.abe]

10. I think Trump wanted Kavaugh because of his position against indicting a sitting President.

Do we know what Barrett's position on this issue?

I suspect this will end up at SCOTUS at some point and Trump knows it.

[Ilsa]

12. That was my thought.

Kavanaughty is a double bonus for trump, appeasing the base before midterms to protect himself and getting a savior onto SCOTUS to protect himself.

[mr_liberal]

13. Thats probably part of it too.

But he's not even Trumps pick. Trump doesn't know who to pick. He's an ignoramus about these things. If it was up to him he'd pick Jeanine Pirro or someone on tv.

Kavanagh was groomed and chosen by the federalist society and republican establishment. and like i said there are reports that he was okayed by Kennedy as someone Kennedy trusted as not being too conservative. He was a Kennedy clerk.

[honest.abe]

24. How do we know he wasn't Trump's pick?

I dont believe anything he says or "leaked" out from the Republicans or WH.

[dem4decades]

11. Not really related but: we would like to see the RBG movie, anyone have a link?

Thanks, I know I can count on DU to help.

[Pachamama]

21. CNN may show it again and it might even be showing at local theaters still

If you go to the website www.rbgmovie.com there might also be info of where you can find it....

Great movie.... for a great woman....

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe she is more overt about opposing Roe V Wade

That would make it hard for Collins and Murkowski to not oppose her. So she presents complications also.

[librechik]

25. One snag. She's a she.

These guys will not like that. Why do you think she's not already there?

[Turbineguy]

27. I'm sure they have a plan.

They'll throw Kavanaugh away like old news. If the new Judge might not save trump, they have still a few months to convince him/her to do so. In a pinch the Russians can deliver some juicy kompromat to help.

[Amishman]

29. No, but they can just confirm her (or whoever) after

No reason they can't do a confirmation during the lame duck session. The outgoing R's would have zero accountability.