Trump's Low Polling Numbers Force Senate To Rethink SCOTUS Nomination

Trump's Low Polling Numbers Force Senate To Rethink SCOTUS Nomination
Published: 01 Sep, 2016
2 min read

It's now been 169 days since President Obama nominated Chief Judge Merrick Garland to fill Justice Antonin Scalia's vacant seat on the Supreme Court.

The waiting game to act on Garland's nomination has become status quo in the headlines. It's just assumed now that action on the nomination will have to wait until after November's election.

But at least some Republican senators are questioning this tactic, realizing what would be at stake if Trump lost his bid for the presidency -- or even worse if the Republicans also lost their control over the Senate.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley hinted this week that hearings could take place during a 'lame duck' session of Congress -- and while this was quickly countered by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's office, even the consideration is showing the angst within the rank-and-file Republicans.

'What if?' is too powerful of a motivator in this high-stakes game of political Russian-roulette, with the worst outcome being a Clinton victory paired with a withdrawal of Garland's nomination by President Obama.

In a field of unlimited uncertainty, Garland has at least some qualities that are appealing to the conservatives.

He's a decade older than the last three justices were at time of appointment. Like it or not, the length of tenure is certainly a factor to consider.

With a lengthy history on the bench and more moderate appeal than Kagan or Sotomayor, a partial victory of confirming a more moderate justice would be a bitter pill to swallow, but it would still be better than being forced to consider a more liberal nominee.

And they also have to consider that many of the 4-4 ties at the Supreme Court have been outright losses -- most recently the N. Carolina voting laws being blocked, but also a long stream of tied rulings that will eventually be revisited by the court.

IVP Donate

But one thing is certain, as rhetoric heats up on both sides about the Senate's inaction, it will be a tell-tale sign of how the political fortune tellers are reading the signs for the next two months.

Because one side will use this nomination as a political weapon, while the other will use it as damage control -- and it's not totally apparent yet which role each party will be taking.

Photo Credit: Albert H. Teich / Shutterstock.com

You Might Also Like

New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
Using verified California voter file data, IVP surveyed high-propensity voters from February 13 through 20. The poll tested first-choice ballot preferences alongside issue intensity on affordability and the cost of living, immigration enforcement, more choice reform, and more....
23 Feb, 2026
-
10 min read
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
Polls consistently show that nearly all Americans across the political spectrum agree that there is too much money in politics – whether from foreign sources, corporations, or so-called “dark money” groups. ...
23 Feb, 2026
-
13 min read
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
The overlap between committee assignments and stock ownership is not automatically illegal. Because the current legal framework permits this proximity as long as disclosure rules are followed, lawmakers are not operating under a system that forces change....
20 Feb, 2026
-
4 min read