In the words of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., “our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature.” This sentiment is felt by many with the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Though she may have been of small stature, she was a “giant of the law.” She was a champion for justice for so many, regardless of race, gender, or disability. RBG passionately and unapologetically advocated for those without a voice during her life’s work. Her legacy will continue to inspire generations to come with her fierce dissents, firm conviction, and remarkable ability to have the last word. Despite obstacles of prejudice in her early years, she persevered and had an extraordinary career.
But what does her passing, just weeks before the 2020 presidential election mean for the vacant seat in the Supreme Court? To quote some of her final words, “my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” In a way, these words were the final dissent of the liberal lioness. Unfortunately, it does not appear likely that the Senate will honor this wish. Mere hours after the passing of RBG, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made it clear that he intended to bring a Trump nominee for the seat to a vote. The swift actions of President Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell to confirm a replacement has implications far surpassing a six-three conservative court. A Trump nominee has the potential to “cement a conservative majority on the court for a generation or more, even if Joe Biden wins the presidential election in November.”
With Trump’s official nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, “Barrett, 48, would fill the vacancy left by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, preserving the Court’s gender balance of three women and six men while potentially tipping its ideological balance for decades.” With Trump’s nomination, it is expected that Barrett will be confirmed by the Republican-majority Senate and could be “seated before the November 3rd election.” Those in opposition to this nominee fear her stance on important issues such as protections for LGBTQ Americans, immigration, the Affordable Care Act, and abortion rights. Barrett, having a strictly conservative stance on abortion rights, hardly shares the same liberal views of RBG. Barrett is an advocate of originalism and textualism unlike the shoes of the woman she may be filling. While Barrett receives high praise from her allies and colleagues, her deeply conservative views implicate the possibility of undoing RBG’s life work.
Shortly after Mitch McConnell voiced his intent to bring forth a Trump nominee for a vote, videos resurfaced of Senator Lindsey Graham, who in 2016, said: “use my words against me” if he were to advocate the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice in any President’s final year of their term. After blocking President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to replace Antonin Scalia in 2016, in the words of CNN Legal Analysis Elliot Williams, “McConnell’s mental gymnastics in justifying his decision would be laughable if their implications weren’t so tragic.”
This move by the Supreme Court will undoubtedly create new restrictions on abortion rights, and “although it is not clear that replacing Ginsburg with a Justice hostile to abortion rights would definitely lead to a decision overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling guaranteeing women’s right to abortion,” it will likely accelerate the trend “of the court permitting more government-imposed limits on the procedure.” The American people ought to have a say in who the next Supreme Court Justice is. The seat, therefore, should remain vacant until a new president is elected.
