Court between a Shock, and a Hard Race

Over the weekend the seemingly sudden death was announced of Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court. Though I am not so immersed in American Politics as to be able to recall the specifics of his traditionally very conservative, but very eloquent rulings in historic Supreme Court decisions, I do recall seeing him and the full Supreme Court in action on a visit once to Washington DC. Remembering his name (because it seemed like a mis-spelled 'Antony') and those of his colleagues on the Supreme Court was also an easy way to pick up an additional point or two in A-Level Politics essay questions. Not something that I can say for any of the members of the British Supreme Court, however.

However, I find myself once again fascinated by the machinations of what happens next in the efforts to replace Scalia during what is already a fraught Presidential election year. The current President Obama has the first play now, by naming a nominee who must first clear the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, and then receive majority approval by the Senate (which the Republicans currently control). 

The Republicans would prefer to delay any Obama nominee for fear of a new, and potentially youthful liberal taking root on the Court for many years to come. In the immediate near term, such a candidate would shift the balance of the Court from 5-4 Conservative to 5-4 Liberal. 

Obama could, of course, throw a staunch liberal into the mix as a candidate likely doomed to failure, if only to demonstrate the lengths Republicans will go to delay an appointment which, really, should not still be unresolved one year from now when the next President takes office. Republican delays would need to be many, and extensive, to see this issue out for that long. But aren't the Republicans already jeopardising their own election chances with the internal back-biting and civil war that is so apparent in the TV debates? At least one of their number has admitted as such. Any attempt to play the long game on the Supreme Court choice could potentially convince swing voters to go the other way.

However, this Article in the Huffington Post cuts to the chase in terms of what the next appointment could mean in real terms. In particular, the author says that the successful Senate confirmation of an Obama appointed liberal candidate to the Court to replace Scalia at this stage:

"could have profound consequences. It would likely mean a crucial fifth vote to protect the Voting Rights Act and abortion rights. It could also mean the court would be more supportive of efforts to regulate campaign contributions, greenhouse gas emissions and gun ownership. A fifth liberal vote could also result in more scrutiny of the death penalty."

All of which surely points, in the wake of ever regular gun-related homicide stories, ever-escalating election campaign finances, and the never-settled issue of abortion in America, to interesting times ahead. With a further 3 Associate Justices approaching or already into their ninth decade, the party whose candidate becomes the next President will likely have the opportunity to either redress any shift in the Court that Obama is successfully able to see through now, or otherwise further enhance the liberal tendencies of the Court for decades to come.