The CHAOS of an evenly divided SCOTUS.
Bear with me here as I explain this simply.
4-4 rulings on the SCOTUS simply affirm the lower court's ruling, but here is the key point. 4-4 rulings are NOT precedent.
Here's an example of how this can play out.
Texas passes a law tomorrow that bans abortion in all cases at all times. The law is immeditely challenged making its way to the Fifth circuit court of appeals where the extremist conservative judges rule the law is constitutional. It then makes its way to the SCOTUS where, in a 4-4 ruling, it is affirmed that the law is constitutional.
Now, in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, abortion can constitutionally be made illegal.
An identical law is passed in Idaho and again, the law is immediately challenged. The case makes its way to the 9th circuit court of appeals where it is ruled unconstitutional. It then goes to the SCOTUS where in a 4-4 ruling affirms the ruling of the 9th circuit court of appeals.
MAking abortion illegal is now unconstitutional in California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, and Arizona.
So, if a divided court is left without a tie breaking vote for a year, constitutional law can be different depending upon where you live. This can be the case for years or even decades even after the tie breaking vote is nominated and confirmed due to the necessity for an actual case to make its way to the court and for a precedent to actually be set.
What the Republicans suggest by leaving a vacancy on the high court for a year is absolute legal chaos with the law being different based upon where you live.
= new reply since forum marked as read
