Is there any legal or Constitutional reason a nominee for the Supreme Court could NOT be named ahead of time, vetted & Senate approved ahead of time—waiting in the wings until an opening occurred?
There’s certainly no Constitutional barrier to doing that. Interesting idea. Of course, a new administration could ignore that candidate and simply nominate someone new.
“””Is there any legal or Constitutional reason a nominee for the Supreme Court could NOT be named ahead of time, vetted & Senate approved ahead of time—waiting in the wings until an opening occurred?”””
He/she might say “Good Morning” in passing to a Russian after being approved. ;)
Senate Rules and protocols would be prohibitive.
There is no mechanism to remove a Justice who is permanently incapacitated so they can’t resign but can’t do their job either. Something RBG supporters can hang onto as they do ‘weekend at Bernies’. As far as having one through the process ready to take over? Not happening. While I can’t find a Constitutional reason prohibiting it, politically no.
Since there's no 'official' number of SC justices (so I've read), why could not a new one be confirmed and seated now rather than waiting in the wings? Add another ring to the circus!