“But this article legitimately does raise the likelihood that Trump will have 2 or 3 more picks for the Supreme Court. May he use those picks wisely, to solidify a conservative Court for the next 20 years.”
He needs to do better than Amey Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh. They’re pikers compared to Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Trump has a mandate and 53 senators on his side. He doesn’t need to compromise with the likes of Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins in order to get his judges confirmed. I hope he nominates the most hard-right constitutional judges available.
take heritage out of the equation
I don’t blame Trump for Kavanaugh. Kennedy said he would step down IF Trump nominated Kavanaugh (his former clerk) but that he would stay on until the next administration if Trump refused to nominate Kavanaugh. OK, I get it. Kavanaugh is better than risking a Democrat nominee.
Amy Coney-Barret was the real bad choice. She’s good on religious liberty and gun rights but she’s just like Roberts on the rest....ie she’s a squish.
I doubt that Trump had any notion about federal judges before 2016, and any opinions he has now are left over from the discussions surrounding his first term picks. He subcontracted the judge picking to the Federalist Society, and he’s probably broadened his kitchen cabinet a bit, but he’s out of his element on judges and he knows it.
Thomas and Alito are our superstars, but they are products of an earlier era. Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch are all reasonably solid but all have crossed over on some surprising decisions. But this has always been true of the conservative Justices, who do not act in lockstep like the lefties. By definition, the conservatives are originalists and textualists who think legislative history and the framers’ intent matters, as opposed to activists who think they are dictators in robes who can make it up as they go along. So the conservatives have differences of opinion.
The limiting factor on judicial appointments will be the weakest links in the Senate. We are now freed from the Murkowski-Collins bind. So the question is: who are the three next-weakest GOP Senators who could scuttle a pick? And which of the weak links is up for reelection in 2026 or 2028 and, if in a purple state, might be eager to chalk up some high profile markers of independence from Trump?
I wish there were no weak links in the Republican caucus. But I prefer to stay rooted in the reality-based community. Any incoming president’s window of opportunity for significant change is very short, and Trump is now a lame duck. With all the inherited problems, 2026 might well shape up as a big democrat rebound year. Every Republican congresscritter knows this. The Republicans need to hash out their differences behind closed doors, without burning bridges, not in flame wars on twitter.
Both Trump and the congressional Republicans need to chalk up some wins, hopefully on serious and substantive matters — and ideally do so in a way that continues Trump’s 2024 success in expanding the coalition.
Back during GWB’s administration, the democrats kneecapped Miguel Estrada, superb professional resume and compelling personal story notwithstanding, because the leftist commissars thought he was too good. They decided to short circuit his judicial career early rather than have to oppose a brilliant, conservative Hispanic pick for the Supreme Court down the road. That’s now ancient history, but Miguel Estrada is the kind of pick Trump, the Federalist Society, and the Senate pubbies should be looking for. Hispanic, Asian, black ... as long as they’re conservative and above reproach on personal grounds ... look to build the coalition. Don’t play into democrat caricatures. And as a tiebreaker if a suitable nominee can be found, stick a thumb in the eye of the Ivy League and pick a Justice from a top ten but non-Ivy law school.