US Court fight will start longer-term policy battle

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Senate Elections ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Considerable Controversy ◽  
Federal Appropriations

Significance This would mean a 6-3 conservative majority on the Court, and considerable controversy because Republican Senate leadership refused to consider a Court nominee ahead of the 2016 election. The candidate Trump chooses, and when confirmation is undertaken, will affect the November 3 presidential and Senate elections. Impacts The nomination battle will play into the election, including Trump’s pro-gun and anti-abortion positions. Confirming a new justice, pre-election, would assure a full nine-member Supreme Court to handle any election disputes. House Democrats may seek to slow the confirmation by impeachment proceedings or stalling federal appropriations. If the Democrats win the White House, pressure from progressives to expand the Supreme Court will grow.

Prospects for US politics to end-2017

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Equity Markets ◽  
Election Outcome ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Policy Shifts ◽  
Trump Administration

Subject Prospects for US politics to end-2017. Significance The shock 2016 election outcome brought President Donald Trump to the White House, with a conservative-leaning majority on the Supreme Court and Republican control over both houses of Congress. However, the Trump administration has struggled to push through federal policy shifts in many areas, whether sought by political allies as they see a closing window for decisive change, expected by investors as US equity markets reach record highs or feared by the White House’s Democratic opponents.

US Supreme Court-packing unlikely

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Change ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Presidential Nomination ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
Conservative Bias

Significance Rubio's move comes as several candidates for the Democratic Party's 2020 presidential nomination are discussing 'packing' the Supreme Court -- adding justices intended to nullify the perceived long-term conservative bias of the Court following Trump-era appointments. Impacts A constitutional change to limit the Supreme Court to nine justices is unlikely: amendments are purposely hard. Court-packing would not guarantee 'Democratic' or 'Republican' rulings: much depends on the case and how justices feel. Packing the courts would likely increase their politicisation, and potentially slow their deliberative capacity. If Trump wins a second term and Republicans keep the Senate, they will appoint further conservative justices. If the Democrats win the White House and Senate in 2020, they might 'pack' the lower courts.

Sanders will extract price for Clinton endorsement

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Financial Regulation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Deal Making

Significance However, following Clinton's success in the delegate-rich April 29 contests, Sanders is mathematically unable to win the Democratic Party's nomination based solely on pledged delegates from the remaining primaries, setting up a period of political deal-making to build Democratic unity behind Clinton before the party convention beginning on July 25. Impacts The importance of the Supreme Court vacancy will give added impetus for each party to unite and secure the presidency. Sanders's non-interventionist leanings will not affect Clinton's hawkish foreign policy stance. Trump will adopt more populist positions on financial regulation and taxation to appeal for centrist support. Sanders may find more support for his views in a revitalised Democratic Senate majority than in a Clinton White House.

Democrats will avoid block on US Supreme Court pick

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
Personal Influence ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Regulatory Powers

Significance President Donald Trump nominated Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death last year. Congressional Republicans blocked former President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill the vacancy, Judge Merrick Garland, enabling Trump to name a conservative justice to set the balance of the Court after winning the presidential election. At least one Democratic senator has threatened to block Gorsuch’s appointment via upper house procedure. Impacts Future Democratic presidential candidates from the current Senate may suffer in primaries if they allow Gorsuch’s appointment. Gorsuch will help the White House and Congress severely cut back federal regulatory powers. Congressional Republicans are more likely to defy Trump on personnel and policy as his personal influence wanes ahead of the 2020 elections.

The Supreme Court as an electoral issue: evidence from three studies

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Alex Badas ◽  
Elizabeth Simas
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Behavior ◽  
Strong Predictor ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
Senate Elections ◽  
Primary Election ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Conjoint Experiment ◽  
Analyze Data

Abstract Judicial nominations, particularly those to the Supreme Court, have been a salient topic in recent presidential and senate elections. However, there has been little research to determine whether judicial nominations motivate political behavior. Across three studies we demonstrate the important role judicial nominations play in influencing political behavior. In Study 1, we analyze the extent to which voters perceive judicial nominations as an important electoral issue. We find that Republicans—and especially strong Republicans—are more likely to perceive judicial nominations as important. In Study 2, we analyze how congruence with an incumbent Senator's judicial confirmation votes influences voters’ decision to vote for the incumbent. We find that congruence with a Senator's judicial confirmation votes is a strong predictor of vote choice. Finally, in Study 3, we analyze data from an original conjoint experiment aimed at simulating a Senate primary election where voters must select among co-partisans. We find that Republican subjects are more likely to select a primary candidate who prioritizes confirming conservative Supreme Court nominees. Among Democratic subjects, however, we find that Democratic candidates who prioritize the Court might actually suffer negative electoral consequences. Overall, our results demonstrate the importance of judicial nominations as an electoral issue.

Supreme Court setback is a blow to Paraguay's Cartes

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Supreme Court

Subject The politics surrounding impeachment of Supreme Court judges. Significance A cross-party grouping in the Senate has refused to support the impeachment of three Supreme Court judges. This represents a major political setback for President Horacio Cartes and the first opposition victory in Congress since he took office in August 2013. The decision will put pressure on Cartes to accept their demand for a wholesale reform of the Supreme Court. Impacts Cartes faces internal Colorado Party opposition to his re-election ambitions. Congressional opposition to the Supreme Court's impeachment plans will weaken Cartes within the party. The process will do nothing to strengthen the credibility of supposed anti-corruption measures.

Modi's regulatory crackdown on NGOs could backfire

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Similar Action ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Perceived Ability ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Government

Significance In April, similar action was taken against nearly 9,000 other non-profits. These moves are part of intensifying clashes between the government and civil society. Many NGOs are vocal opponents of Modi's key policies, and the government is frustrated at their perceived ability to harness popular opposition and use the judiciary to stall key projects. Impacts Government efforts on coal (and to a lesser extent nuclear energy) will still encounter NGO resistance. The Supreme Court may become embroiled in the NGO-government clash, portending costly and lengthy battles for investors. Western governments are likely to be more sensitive to Modi's regulatory crackdown, risking hurdles in improving diplomatic ties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document