Skip to content Skip to footer

Romney Says He’ll Back Rush to Name Ginsburg Successor

With just weeks until the election, there’s a strong possibility a nominee will be confirmed during a lame-duck session.

Sen. Mitt Romney asks a question to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo as he testifies before a Senate Foreign Relations committee hearing.

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) announced on Tuesday that he would support the process of naming and confirming a nominee for the Supreme Court from President Trump to fill the vacancy created by the recent passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Two recent polls, however, show that most Americans want the process slowed down to allow the winner of November’s presidential election to make that decision.

“I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the President’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications,” Romney said in a statement regarding his decision.

Also on Tuesday, Trump on Twitter said he would name his Supreme Court pick this weekend.

“I will be announcing my Supreme Court Nominee on Saturday, at the White House!” the president wrote.

Some had held out hope that the Utah senator would not support a vote before the November presidential election, which is just 42 days away, and would further support allowing the winner of that election — either Trump, or his main rival, Democratic nominee Joe Biden — to make the eventual pick for the high court. To prevent rushing through the nomination before the election, however, every senator in the Democratic Party (including those who caucus with them), plus four Republican senators, would have to pledge not to support the process.

Only two Republicans so far — Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — have made such a proclamation. With Romney’s announcement on Tuesday, however, it’s almost a certainty that a vote before the election will happen.

Many legal experts have noted that the push to replace Ginsburg, who died on Friday, is hypocritical, as Republicans refused to even consider hearings for then-President Barack Obama’s judicial nominee when he sought to fill a seat left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016. GOP lawmakers justified their refusal to act at the time by arguing the American people should have a say in the matter through that year’s presidential election, even though it was 10 months away.

Just six weeks out from this year’s presidential race, Republicans have changed their tune, insisting that a replacement be named and voted on before voters have a say in who the next president will be.

As for the American people, two polls out this week demonstrate they do not agree with the GOP’s move to rush a lifetime judicial appointment to the highest court in the country. Instead, a majority of the people want the same standard used in 2016 to be applied this time around, too.

A Politico/Morning Consult poll published this week found that 50 percent of Americans want the winner of this year’s presidential race to pick the Supreme Court’s next justice. Only 37 percent said that Trump should make the pick, regardless of whether he’s the winner or not.

Respondents in a Reuters/Ipsos poll, also published this week, voiced more opposition to the move by Republicans. Less than a quarter of Americans (23 percent), according to that poll, said Trump should make the pick right now or during the lame duck session after the election, while 62 percent said that the eventual winner of the election should make the pick. Notably within that poll, 5 in 10 Republican respondents also said the eventual winner of the presidential election should be the one to decide.

Since 1975, it has typically taken around 70 days for a Supreme Court nominee to receive a vote in the Senate regarding their appointment. With the election day set to occur 42 days from now, there’s a high possibility that Trump, who is projected by a number of analysts to be losing his election fight against Biden at the moment, could lose the election but have his nominee confirmed nonetheless after the election takes place.

Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn

Dear Truthout Community,

If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.

We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.

Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.

There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.

Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?

It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.

We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.

We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.

Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.

We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.

With love, rage, and solidarity,

Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy