Controversy on Capitol Hill Story by Lucy Gomez // Design by Nick Drexler
O
n Sept. 18, the world mourned the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and braced themselves for a whole new level of conflict surrounding her replacement. As Nov. 3 approaches, Americans have braced themselves for a momentous election following the coronavirus pandemic and protests over racial injustice. The recent death of Justice Ginsburg has created even more political turmoil. When news of Ginsburg’s death surfaced, Democrats and Republicans alike each made it very clear of how and when they preferred her seat to be filled. Democrats advocated to wait until after the election was over to fill the seat, but President Trump pushed to confirm a replacement for Ginsburg before the election. The opposing viewpoints created yet another issue for Congress as both parties unleashed a rush of fundraising. “It’s been coming for years,” senior Danny Michel said. “Everyone knew that as soon as that seat was open, there was going to be so much controversy over it.” Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden criticized the president’s decision to nominate someone so quickly and appealed to Senate Republicans to stop him from making a decision that would drastically shift the balance of power on the Supreme Court before the election.
Supreme Court vacancy brings new wave of tension ahead of election
“To jam this nomination through the Senate is an exercise in raw political power,” Biden said in a speech in Philadelphia. This is certainly not the first time this kind of problem has existed. A similar situation occurred during the 2016 election when President Barack Obama nominated chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Merrick Garland, to fill the seat left vacant by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death. Majority Leader
nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace Ginsburg. Barrett’s addition to the Supreme Court will shift its balance to the right, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority. “She’s a conservative law professor that Republicans think will serve their interest well on the court,” said Southern Methodist University professor Cal Jillson. “Smart lady, but by no means the extraordinary genius that she is described as.” Trump praised Barrett’s achievements and intellect, while Barrett herself paid homage to Ginsburg’s work and legacy. “Justice Ginsburg began her career at a time when women were not welcome in the legal profession. But she not only broke glass ceilings- she smashed them,” Barrett told an audience in the White House’s Rose Garden. Democrats argued the nomination could devastate the Affordable Care Act and diminish women’s reproductive rights, due to Barrett’s anti-abortion views. Barrett would be the third anti-abortion justice nominated by Trump after Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. In the position of judge, Barrett heard two abortion-rights cases and voted to limit access in both cases. “I think that if the Republicans were to strike down abortion, what that would mean is that it would return the initiative to the states and many states would either outlaw or make abortion very difficult,” Jillson said. “Even if the Supreme
“This is raw politics. It’s not about right or wrong. It’s about what you can and cannot do.”
12 BAGPIPE
Mitch McConnell argued it was important for the Senate to wait until a new president had been elected before filling the seat. Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to hold a hearing with Garland, and Republican leaders agreed with McConnell that the new justice should be appointed by the winner of the election. The majority of America thinks the same should have happened this time. In a poll conducted by Reuters and Ipsos between Sept. 19-20, 62 percent of Americans said the Supreme Court seat should be filled by the winner of the election. However, on Sept. 26, it seemed Republicans had won when Trump
