Trump's shortlist for Supreme Court pick

President Donald Trump interviewed four candidates for the next Supreme Court nominee to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Posted: Jul 3, 2018 10:05 PM
Updated: Jul 3, 2018 10:38 PM

Ever since the failed nomination of Robert Bork, whose rejection allowed an obscure federal court of appeals judge from Sacramento named Anthony Kennedy to become the 104th Justice of the US Supreme Court, presidential administrations have displayed extreme care and thoroughness in their vetting of candidates for the court.

A playbook has developed for use by both Democratic and Republican administrations. Many commentators believe that Presidents have adopted nuanced approaches for determining candidates' likely votes on hot-button issues. A 1985 article in Newsweek reported that the first thing judicial candidates, sitting down to talk with Reagan's chief judge picker, would say is "pleased to meet you." And the second: "Roe v. Wade ... was wrongly decided."

But even as they put in place increasingly sophisticated and dependable methods to ferret out a candidate's judicial philosophy and predict her likely voting pattern on the court, Presidents and advisers have been exceptionally careful to insist they don't impose particular "litmus tests" -- pledges to decide particular issues in specific ways.

Thus, as another of Reagan's judge pickers insisted, "We don't get into political questions, activities, associations or views. We don't test candidates by ideology or use a litmus test." Similar pledges have become compulsory for every administration.

It's not hard to see why. "Litmus test" questions, if discovered, can and should doom a candidacy. As Lincoln famously explained: "We cannot ask a man what he will do, and if we should, and he should answer us, we should despise him for it." (Less well-known is the lesson Lincoln drew from that axiom: "Therefore, we must take a (person) whose opinions are known.")

It would be the ultimate dereliction of duty for a judge to decide a case based not on the facts and law, but because of a pledge to a political patron. Even if the pledge coincided with the judge's own view, it would be corrupt of the President to trade a judicial appointment for a promise of a particular vote -- as if the judge's fealty was to his patron and not the law -- and ignominious of the candidate to accept the deal.

There are compelling practical reasons as well why pledges of specific votes are a sort of third rail in judicial selection. If a candidate offered to the President his assurance of how she would vote on a matter likely to come before the court, she would have no defense against the same sorts of assurances to the Senate. She would lose the all-purpose shield of, "I'm sorry Senator, but I cannot answer that question because it is an issue that might come before me if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed."

Thus, every President, certainly since Reagan, has insisted he did not and would not ask litmus-test questions, and given the sophistication of the nomination process, there is every reason to think that those assurances were accurate.

When I worked on judicial nominations, including Supreme Court nominations, in the Clinton administration, it was axiomatic that any litmus test questions were strictly off limits.

Enter Donald Trump. Trump's judicial selection process actually has been efficient and professional, in marked contrast to the chaotic and noxious administration in almost all other policy areas. White House Counsel Don McGahn, who will oversee the nomination and attempted confirmation of the next justice, surely will impress upon him that he simply may not seek to exact a pledge of a particular vote of any sort from his nominee.

And with any other President, that would likely quiet any concerns. But in the first place, Trump is a comically uninhibited rule-breaker who boasts about making decisions by his gut. He is -- and I wish I were the first to put it this way but I'm not -- the glandular President.

More importantly, we already know Trump is wont to try to exact improper pledges of personal loyalty to him above loyalty to the law. That is exactly what James Comey said he did with him, and Comey immediately recognized the stunning impropriety of the encounter, which he understood sought to ensure the FBI director's allegiance to the President above the law. Trump appears unaware to this day of why the demand was unseemly.

Yet more importantly, Trump is under serious threat of impeachment or criminal liability. From his selfish interests, he wants more than anything a nominee who would protect him at the Supreme Court in the very foreseeable event that questions on which his Presidency and even liberty may turn -- such as: can a President pardon himself? -- come to the court.

No one who has followed the news closely these last 529 days can feel confident that Trump, if left alone with a nominee, would not seek to secure some sort of personal assurance, if only in wink-and-nod form, of votes on specific issues, especially ones that may determine his personal fate.

Yet it would be extraordinarily stupid, brazen, and corrupt, and could fatally compromise the candidate for the court -- reasons enough for every President in modern memory, and perhaps American history, to eschew it, save this one.

Given the high stakes of the nomination and the character of the President, expect the first round of questions in the Senate to Trump's nominee to be a series of exacting inquiries about exactly what the President told her and whether he approached or crossed the litmus-test line.

These are straightforward inquiries, and it would be dangerous, not to mention dishonorable, for a candidate to answer dishonestly. If in fact it were to emerge that Trump had sought some sort of pledge, it would likely upend the nomination and force the administration into a do-over that would extend the confirmation battle past the midterm elections.

It is very hard to imagine such an extreme self-inflicted wound, but if any President has what it takes to inflict it, it's Trump.

Indiana Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Confirmed Cases: 67857

Reported Deaths: 2975
CountyConfirmedDeaths
Marion14710719
Lake7037269
Elkhart458276
Allen3611157
St. Joseph311479
Hamilton2489104
Cass17509
Hendricks1742105
Vanderburgh170012
Johnson1648118
Porter117439
Tippecanoe109411
Clark107545
Madison84265
LaPorte82929
Kosciusko81612
Howard80464
Marshall74222
Bartholomew73847
Floyd68444
Monroe68430
Noble63528
Delaware63352
Boone63246
Dubois62412
Hancock61637
Jackson5514
LaGrange54210
Shelby50926
Warrick50230
Grant49629
Vigo46810
Dearborn46128
Morgan41832
Henry36118
Clinton3523
White34510
Montgomery33821
Lawrence32627
Wayne3159
Decatur31332
Harrison28922
Miami2582
Scott24710
Daviess24319
Greene23834
DeKalb2214
Putnam2218
Jennings20712
Franklin20510
Jasper2032
Steuben1993
Gibson1984
Ripley1887
Perry17112
Starke1647
Orange16324
Wabash1583
Posey1570
Fayette1547
Jefferson1492
Whitley1486
Fulton1442
Carroll1422
Wells1312
Knox1290
Huntington1183
Washington1151
Spencer1133
Newton10910
Tipton1065
Randolph1024
Clay975
Jay820
Adams812
Rush794
Owen781
Sullivan751
Pulaski711
Brown701
Fountain632
Benton600
Blackford532
Ohio504
Parke451
Pike450
Switzerland430
Crawford420
Martin420
Vermillion380
Union320
Warren191
Unassigned0200

Ohio Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Confirmed Cases: 93031

Reported Deaths: 3529
CountyConfirmedDeaths
Franklin17107514
Cuyahoga12646477
Hamilton9110247
Lucas4852318
Montgomery402477
Summit3248217
Marion287544
Butler268359
Mahoning2393253
Pickaway235242
Stark1679132
Lorain162076
Warren160035
Columbiana157060
Trumbull1421103
Fairfield123825
Delaware119418
Licking111642
Clark107613
Lake103435
Wood91058
Clermont83510
Medina83133
Miami76837
Tuscarawas74613
Portage71160
Allen64642
Greene61911
Belmont58926
Ashtabula53845
Richland53610
Geauga52843
Mercer52213
Erie51627
Wayne49258
Ross3874
Huron3714
Ottawa35225
Athens3441
Madison32910
Sandusky32917
Holmes3206
Darke31627
Hancock3152
Lawrence2160
Union2141
Auglaize2135
Jefferson2043
Washington19722
Putnam19317
Coshocton1856
Scioto1851
Muskingum1781
Knox1652
Crawford1645
Preble1642
Morrow1582
Shelby1574
Seneca1533
Hardin15012
Clinton1466
Fulton1391
Ashland1303
Defiance1294
Highland1271
Williams1233
Logan1201
Wyandot1195
Brown1121
Guernsey1106
Hocking1089
Carroll1075
Henry1061
Champaign1051
Perry1052
Fayette940
Monroe9018
Van Wert681
Pike660
Jackson650
Paulding590
Gallia571
Adams532
Vinton302
Meigs240
Morgan200
Harrison191
Noble160
Unassigned00
Fort Wayne
Clear
68° wxIcon
Hi: 79° Lo: 61°
Feels Like: 68°
Angola
Clear
64° wxIcon
Hi: 79° Lo: 59°
Feels Like: 64°
Huntington
Overcast
64° wxIcon
Hi: 78° Lo: 60°
Feels Like: 64°
Decatur
68° wxIcon
Hi: 78° Lo: 62°
Feels Like: 68°
Van Wert
68° wxIcon
Hi: 78° Lo: 61°
Feels Like: 68°
More scattered rain & storms on Monday
WFFT Radar
WFFT Temperatures
WFFT National

Community Events