Historically…
Historically, if a left leaning Supreme Court judge passes away, the president will still replace him or her with a left leaning appointee in order to keep the balance in the system, even if the political views do not coincide with that president. By President Obama appointing Judge Merrick Garland, this goes against what politicians have historically chosen. This is why conservatives do not believe that Obama should have the authority to appoint Garland. Since he has entered a lame duck period, many believe that the judge should not be appointed until after the election. Conservatives particularly do not want Garland to be considered based upon the overt list that Donald Trump has recently released.
Rhetoric Surrounding Trump’s Supreme Court Appointees
Recently, Donald Trump released a list of appointees he would consider to replace the late Judge Scalia. The rhetoric Donald Trump used was unlike the methods that most politicians use, especially as a presidential candidate. It is representative of his unorthodox campaign style. He explicitly named the eleven judges he was considering, which is unusual for a candidate to do, as they typically speak in general terms of what they value in the position or qualities of a person in order to appeal to the masses of the party and voters in general. However, by using this blatant tactic of explicitly naming rather than generalizing, it enhances Trumps style of being “upfront and honest” as stated by many supporters. Through naming each of the eleven candidates, Trump was able to reassure conservatives who perhaps doubted him, and gain support through satisfying their taste for who should be a supreme court justice regarding what the values should be. Donald Trump had to pay close attention to the rhetoric of what conservatives desired in order to maintain party support, since in the past many Republicans did not side with him. By strategically choosing those who appealed most to his party—judges who are law-abiding conservatives, strict to the constitution, and less politically motivated, he was able to get more people on his terms.
The Appointees
The people on the list that Trump composed consisted of eleven strict conservatives, many of which chosen by the Conservative Heritage Foundation. The judges are people who are strict interpreters of the constitution, and are young, which acts as an advantage. However, the contenders are the complete opposite of President Barack Obama’s replacement choice, Judge Merrick Garland. Since Trump had very much outside help for his choices, the appointee options are apparently very well accepted by Conservatives who were skeptical of Trump’s devotion to the Conservative Party.
Rhetoric Surrounding the Democratic Party
Although Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee choices are extremely appealing to conservatives, they may not be as glittered with gold to the Democratic Party. Through choosing judges who are strict interpreters of the constitution, that deems social issues which may be interpreted differently at a risk for rulings that do not consider outside views such as liberals and moderates. The choices and rulings made will affect generations to come, and the future of our country. By having far right leaning supreme court judges, that may not exactly balance the system, since liberal views would not be taken remotely into consideration.
What’s Next?
The choosing of supreme court appointees is perhaps one of the most important decisions a candidate faces as their selection largely impacts the future of lawmaking and future generations. Although Trump’s rhetoric reflects the values of the conservative party, judges in that arena will very much displease liberals based on lawmaking that would pertain to abortion, women’s rights, gun laws, etc which is why democrats so badly want to take advantage of the opportunity to fill a seat of the supreme court with a liberal. However, it is important to keep the balance in the Supreme Court after a judge passes, so it could be detrimental to the harmony if a liberal judge was seated. Furthermore, the rhetoric Trump put in place regarding his exact choices for supreme court nominees posed as an advantage for him in the future of his candidacy as he chose candidates which are appealing to his party, benefitting him immensely with regard to future trust in policy.
I really like the direction you went with this post. In fact, we had a very similar idea. I knew I wanted to focus on Trump’s list of appointees and you did the same. I believe the fact that you note Trump’s choices oppose that of our current president is important. You also provided good graphics and I believe overall, you did a very good job.