Show an ad over header. AMP

How Amy Coney Barrett would change the way the Supreme Court works

Appointing three Supreme Court justices will likely be President Trump’s most important achievement, and Judge Amy Coney Barrett may well be the most important of the three.

Why it matters: Barrett would transform the court’s internal politics, handicapping Chief Justice John Roberts and establishing a new center of gravity on the right. Her presence would force a whole new set of strategic calculations among the justices — and those calculations will shape the law of the land for a generation.

The big picture: When you hear that Barrett would usher in a more conservative court, that doesn’t necessarily mean she’ll be writing deeply conservative rulings on abortion or health care or any other hot-button issue. In fact, that’s unlikely to happen for a long time.

  • If Barrett is confirmed, she would be the most junior justice, and the most junior justice rarely gets to write any blockbuster rulings.
  • But behind the scenes, her confirmation would shake up the balance of power on the court dramatically.

Where it stands: Before Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, Roberts was the court’s ideological center, and firmly in control of the court.

  • That meant conservatives usually won, but those wins were often tempered by Roberts' views about the court’s role in the political process and how best to maintain the public’s trust.
  • Roberts sometimes sides with the court’s liberal wing not necessarily because he is liberal, but as a way to control how the court moves. He uses his power to ensure that it’s his hand on the wheel.

Roberts is about to lose some of that power. He’ll still be the chief justice, of course, but if Barrett is confirmed, the rest of the conservative bloc will be able to force his hand —and some of his most effective tactics to steer the pace and tenor of the court will become useless.

  • Siding with the liberals as a way to slow down his conservative colleagues won’t work any more. Once the court has a 6-3 majority, one defection won’t swing the outcome.
  • So, even in cases where Roberts fears his conservative colleagues are moving too fast or too aggressively, his only way to constrain them will be to vote with them, then write the ruling himself and try to keep it narrow.
  • But it can’t be too narrow. If the other five can’t live with what Roberts has written, they can always break off and write their own, and that would become the majority opinion.

How it works: When the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act in 2012, Roberts reportedly wanted to strike down the law’s individual mandate, while leaving the rest intact. But the rest of the conservative justices wouldn’t go for that — they wanted to strike the whole thing.

  • Then, Roberts had the power to defect to the liberals and uphold the entire law. If he were on a similar island within this new conservative majority, however, the whole ACA would be toast.
  • Earlier this year, the rest of the court’s conservatives voted to overturn a recent precedent and uphold a set of abortion restrictions the court had previously struck down. Roberts, again, sided with the liberals to stop that from happening — a ruling that only served to slow conservatives’ roll, not to establish any new liberal precedent.
  • Experts said that was likely a strategic decision borne out of Roberts’ views of how to protect the court’s public standing. If that case came before the court after Barrett’s confirmation, though, Roberts likely would have had to get on board the more conservative train to have any chance of slowing it down.

Trump’s other nominees haven’t had the same impact.

  • Justice Neil Gorsuch replaced the late Antonin Scalia, which did not change the court’s ideological balance. When Justice Brett Kavanaugh replaced Anthony Kennedy, Roberts’ control over the court increased, because he became the only potential swing vote.
  • But because Barrett would be replacing a staunch liberal, she’ll pull the ideological balance of the court to Roberts’ right and forge a conservative majority that can live without him.

How Biden might tackle the Iran deal

Four more years of President Trump would almost certainly kill the Iran nuclear deal — but the election of Joe Biden wouldn’t necessarily save it.

The big picture: Rescuing the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is near the top of Biden's foreign policy priority list. He says he'd re-enter the deal once Iran returns to compliance, and use it as the basis on which to negotiate a broader and longer-lasting deal with Iran.

Keep reading... Show less

Democrats look to Kamala Harris as bridge to next generation

Progressive leaders see Sen. Kamala Harris, if she's elected vice president, as their conduit to a post-Biden Democratic Party where the power will be in younger, more diverse and more liberal hands.

  • Why it matters: The party's rising left sees Harris as the best hope for penetrating Joe Biden's older, largely white inner circle.

If Biden wins, Harris will become the first woman, first Black American and first Indian American to serve as a U.S. vice president — and would instantly be seen as the first in line for the presidency should Biden decide against seeking a second term.

Keep reading... Show less

Technical glitch in Facebook's ad tools creates political firestorm

Facebook said late Thursday that a mix of "technical problems" and confusion among advertisers around its new political ad ban rules, caused issues affecting ad campaigns of both parties.

Why it matters: A report out Thursday morning suggested the ad tools were causing campaign ads, even those that adhered to Facebook's new rules, to be paused. Very quickly, political campaigners began asserting the tech giant was enforcing policies in a way that was biased against their campaigns.

Keep reading... Show less

States beg for Warp Speed billions to distribute COVID-19 vaccines

Operation Warp Speed has an Achilles' heel: States need billions to distribute vaccines — and many say they don't have the cash.

Why it matters: The first emergency use authorization could come as soon as next month, but vaccines require funding for workers, shipping and handling, and for reserving spaces for vaccination sites.

Keep reading... Show less

Court rules Minnesota absentee ballots must be received by 8 p.m. Election Day

An appeals court on Thursday ruled that Minnesota absentee ballots must be received by 8 p.m. on Election Day to be counted.

Why it matters: The ruling, which comes just five days before the election, blocks the state's plan to count absentee ballots arriving late so long as they're postmarked by Nov. 3 and delivered within a week of the election. Now those ballots must be set aside and marked late.

Keep reading... Show less

Twitter labels tweet from RT implying voter fraud in U.S. elections

Twitter on Thursday labeled a tweet from Russian state media outlet RT (formerly Russia Today) that included a video implying widespread voter fraud is plaguing, and potentially delegitimizing, the U.S. election.

Why it matters: It's the first time Twitter has labeled RT's account with a civic integrity label, or a designation used to highlight efforts to manipulate or interfere in elections or other civic processes.

Keep reading... Show less

U.S. tops 88,000 COVID-19 cases, setting new single-day record

Data: COVID Tracking Project; Chart: Axios Visuals

The United States reported 88,452 new coronavirus cases on Thursday, setting a single-day record, according to data from the COVID Tracking Project.

The big picture: The country confirmed 1,049 additional deaths due to the virus, and there are over 46,000 people currently hospitalized, suggesting the U.S. is experiencing a third wave heading into the winter months.

Keep reading... Show less

The norms around science and politics are cracking

Crafting successful public health measures depends on the ability of top scientists to gather data and report their findings unrestricted to policymakers.

State of play: But concern has spiked among health experts and physicians over what they see as an assault on key science protections, particularly during a raging pandemic. And a move last week by President Trump, via an executive order, is triggering even more worries.

Keep reading... Show less



Get Goodhumans in your inbox

Most Read

More Stories