Quick March

The sorry Kabuki-esque nature of this week’s Supreme Court confirmation process has generated plenty of heat but relatively little light. We have seen this movie before, and once should have been enough. Does it have to happen again when the next Supreme Court vacancy occurs? The process has to be standardized, by legislation or some other means. Clearly, we can’t completely remove partisan politics from what goes on, but there are ways to make it fair, or at least fair-er. So I’m going to try an idea.

To start with, there should be a series of deadlines, with the clock starting as soon as there is a vacancy on the Court -- a deadline for the President to make a nomination – with one or two backups in case the first choice falls out. All three would be subject to background checks by the FBI. There is another deadline for the Senate Judiciary Committee to open hearings for the nominee. As part of that, there is a deadline for receiving information about the nominee from other sources to be turned over to the FBI – this, to discourage last-minute bomb-throwing – a “speak now or forever hold your peace” provision for this process. All government records relating to the nominee would have to be made available to the committee in a timely manner. The ommittee would only question the nominee during the hearings. Others with information would face questioning by the FBI.

The committee would have its own deadline for taking a vote, and the full Senate would have a deadline for yea-ing or naying the nominee. If it’s nay, the Judiciary Committee moves on to the second choice, and if necessary, the third.

Under this timeline, there would be no more Merrick Garland situations. The Judiciary Committee, even if the majority were from an opposing party to the President, could not hold things over until a new President took office.

I’m sure you can see the flaws in this. Suppose a vacancy occurs in an outgoing President’s last days before a new President is inaugurated? I know that’s a problem. But it would be more the timing governing the process and less the party politics. It’s certainly not a perfect scheme – but then, how’s the current one working for us?