Future SCOTUS nominations will require one party controls both Senate and White House

[Recursion]

At least, I can't see a way out of that. I think between Garland and today, there's been a pretty radical change, and no future Senate will consider (let alone confirm) appointees of the other party's President. Which is not at all good.

[unblock]

1. which means opposite parties controlling white house and senate leads to unfilled seats

which means we could have, say, an 8 or 12 year stretch of the supreme court going from 9 seats to 8 seats to 7 or even 6 seats,....


followed by finally getting a white house and senate of the same party, and a quick, partisan filling of several seats.


we could see an enormous swing in the court down the road.

[Warpy]

2. Well, only if the Republicans fail to grow up

Before Ronnie gave the party to the evangelicals, there was compromise. Yes, Rehnquist got in, but he had solid credentials and was more quietly crazy than Bork...or Gorsuch. Nominees from either party got bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition.

Republicans are all mean little schoolyard bullies these days who refuse to play games unless they make all the rules.