Friday's announcement of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens' retirement has raised somewhat of a dilemma for Republicans whose seats will be contested in the coming midterm elections. With the minority party gunning to regain Congressional seats and possibly the majority it lost in the 2006 elections in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, many current Republican members of Congress are torn between opposing President Barack Obama's forthcoming selection on principle, thereby appealing to their more conservative base, or avoiding the political fight that would ensue and confirming the nominee — who is predicted to be centrist — as long as he or she does not seem to hold views that veer toward the left.
During midterm elections, all 435 seats in the House of Representatives as well as 34 of the seats in the Senate are up for grabs. Additionally, many state gubernatorial races are decided during midterm elections, making the months leading up to November crucial for members of Congress trying to solidify support within their own party or hold on to hotly contested seats. For candidates whose positions are particularly precarious — such as Sen. John McCain (R−Ariz.), who is facing opposition from the more conservative former congressman and talk−radio host J.D. Hayworth — the temptation to stick to the party line and automatically raise a strong opposition to Obama's Supreme Court nominee should not be underestimated. Indeed, with the passage of the health care bill, there may be few opportunities between now and Congress' summer recess for members to give any substantial champion party values aside from at the confirmation hearings.
The staunch Republican resistance that accompanied the appointment of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, during which Republicans attempted to block and postpone the appointment of Obama's nominee for as long as possible, provides a glimpse into what the upcoming confirmation hearing could be like. However, this tendency to make the confirmation process politicized is not unique to Republicans: Democrats, including Obama, often receive criticism from their opponents for the fights they raised against former President George W. Bush's judicial nominees.
But opposition, as Republicans discovered during Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, is expensive. Conservatives had announced plans to mount a full−scale campaign against her appointment, only to realize that they were without the funds necessary for such an extensive endeavor. No Republicans seem particularly inclined to filibuster Obama's upcoming choice, but they could look to reap some political capital from it. Some believe that the party perceives a populist opposition to President Obama — exemplified by the Tea Party movement — whose support the GOP could gain if it raised such issues as gun control, abortion rights or religion, all of which are likely to come up in discussions surrounding the philosophies of Supreme Court nominees.
However, some Republican leaders, such as Sen. Lamar Alexander (R−Tenn.) and Sen. John Cornyn (R−Texas), have said that they intend to take politics out of the equation when examining the President's nominee. This may seem unlikely in a process that is so frequently politicized, but the sentiments of people like Cornyn, who on April 11 told The New York Times, "We need to do our due diligence, and we need to probably bend over backwards both in appearance and in reality to give the nominee a fair process," are extremely promising.
The Daily applauds those Republicans who seem willing to be open, flexible and to make decisions about the nomination based upon the facts rather than party politics or personal political gain. While nothing is guaranteed, we hope it is this attitude that comes through in the upcoming confirmation hearings and begins to find its way back into the minds of Congressmen on both sides of the aisle.
