Democrats seek electoral returns in a process of replacement in the Supreme Court that they cannot stop

Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer greet each other on Capitol Hill.JONATHAN ERNST / POOL / EFE

With a Republican majority virtually guaranteed, Democratic senators will hardly be able to prevent conservative Amy Coney Barrett from becoming Supreme Court Justice replacing the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The question is how painful they are willing to go through the process and how they can try to make a profit out of it for the November elections.

The strategy is to raise the political tone of the confirmation process and highlight the consequences of the change in the lives of citizens.

The Supreme Court's agenda, which must decide on the health protection of millions of citizens, offers them the opportunity to keep the focus on the pandemic.

The indecorous naturalness with which Mitch McConnell, leader of the Republican majority in the Senate, has forgotten the arguments with which in 2016 he blocked the confirmation of a Supreme Court justice proposed by Barack Obama (it was not appropriate, he defended then, to do so in election year), gives Democrats carte blanche to twist House rules and mores.

Filibustering at Supreme Court justices confirmation hearings was eliminated at McConnell's own initiative in 2017, but Democrats have an arsenal of techniques available to thwart the process.

They could, for example, invoke a rule that allows the session to be adjourned for the rest of the day when the House has been in session for two hours, or repeatedly introduce motions that would require a vote.

McConnelll has already warned his folks to prepare for these tactics, which would be especially damaging to Republican senators engaged in tight re-election battles, as it would make it difficult for them to campaign in their states.

But beyond getting entangled in procedural traps, which would hardly achieve the objective of preventing Barrett's confirmation and could have an electoral cost, there does seem to be a consensus among Democrats about the convenience of turning the process into a political debate that allows them maintain the initiative in the electoral campaign.

The replacement of Ginsburg, an icon of progressive causes, by the highly conservative Barrett marks the biggest ideological shift in the Supreme Court since Clarence Thomas, nominated by Bush Sr., replaced the progressive Thurgood Marshall in 1991. And that ideological shift is what Democrats want to stand out in the debate.

In particular, the idea is to focus on the consequences for citizens of a conservative majority of six justices to three in the Supreme Court.

Lower the legal debate to the real world.

Biden's campaign remains confident that the best it can do is frame the election as a referendum on Trump and his handling of the pandemic.

And the Supreme Court's agenda provides them an opportunity to bring the pandemic to debate in the Senate.

Just a week after the election, the justices will address the legislation known as Obamacare, with which the last Democratic president extended the coverage of public health, and that the Trump Administration and a coalition of Republican states have challenged.

In the midst of a pandemic, the threat of loss of health protection for tens of millions of Americans offers Democrats a powerful argument.

Leading Democrats have already wanted to stress that the party opposes Barrett's appointment from a political point of view, not a personal one.

The replacement in the Supreme Court, Chuck Schumer, leader of the Democratic minority in the Senate, said on television, "represents a real threat to Americans and their lives."

“This is not just a game of politics, Democrats and Republicans.

This nominee and a conservative court will take rights away from Americans, "he added.

"This nomination process threatens the destruction of life and death protections for 135 million Americans," House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi insisted in a statement.

"Even now, in the midst of a global pandemic, the Trump Administration is asking the Supreme Court to strike down the entire law, including protections for people with prior illnesses," said Democratic candidate Joe Biden.

The strategy, at best for Democrats, could put pressure on some Republican senators facing reelection in November, to the point of jeopardizing the simple majority needed for Barrett's confirmation.

It would be enough for two wayward legislators to join the two who have already announced that they will vote against.

But even if that doesn't happen, Democrats are confident that turning the confirmation process into a disenfranchisement debate could translate into punishment of Republicans by the moderate electorate in November.

The further fact that Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris sits on the Upper House Judiciary Committee, where she will be able to display her famous ex-prosecutor interrogative style, provides Biden's campaign with valuable visibility during the process

Barrett's nomination has offered Trump a respite from a career that polls have shown he is losing.

It allows you to divert the focus of your management from a pandemic that has already claimed more than 200,000 lives in the country, and focus on culture wars where you feel comfortable.

The election of a judge, in addition, can restore the appreciation of conservative women alienated by four years of stridency from the president.

Catholic, mother of seven, Republicans hope that many voters will connect with the profile of Barrett, who President Trump highlighted as "the first mother of school-age children to reach the Supreme Court."

For this reason, despite the obvious ideological distance, the Democrats understand that the personal attack on the candidate would be a miscalculation within their strategy of seeking the moderate vote.

Biden and Trump face to face for the first time

In a mostly virtual campaign, Donald Trump and his Democratic rival, Joe Biden, will finally meet tomorrow in the first of three debates of the presidential candidates that will be held before the November 3 elections.

It will be at a university in Cleveland (Ohio) and, like everything in these months, the debate has been transformed by the pandemic.

There will be only one moderator, Fox reporter Chris Wallace, and probably (though not confirmed yet) there will be no audience.

In this first debate, six thematic blocks will be discussed: the trajectories of both candidates, the battle in the Supreme Court, the coronavirus pandemic, the economy, race and violence in cities, and the integrity of the elections.

The face-to-face meeting between the two candidates is the moment that Democratic strategists dreaded the most, as candidate Biden, who has a solid but stagnant lead in the polls, is not notable for his speaking skills and is prone to mistakes and bloopers.

Attacks on Biden's inconsistency and alleged senility are one of President Trump's favorite campaign lines, who has framed the debate as a test for his rival.

His campaign has spent millions of dollars on video ads (often manipulated) of Biden's awkwardness, trying to portray the Democratic candidate as unfit for the US presidency.

The president has lowered his rival's expectations so much that many experts believe he could turn against him, and that any performance by Biden that is not a dismal failure could be branded as a victory.

Subscribe here to the

weekly

about the elections in the United States.