With a few names speculated to already be on President Barack Obama’s shortlist for his replacement of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, a number of analysts say that there is one candidate who the Republican party simply cannot refuse if nominated.
That candidate is U.S. Attorney General, Loretta Lynch.
Highly Qualified Prosecutor
Tom Goldstein, of SCOTUSblog fame, believes Lynch is a “leading contender,” according to NBC News. Goldstein believes President Obama will choose Lynch so strongly that he went as far as to revise a previous SCOTUSblog post that had said he thought Judge Paul Watford, a Ninth Circuit judge, would be at the top of the president’s list. It now lists Lynch as that person instead.
Why did Goldstein go that far? Because, he says,
“Lynch was vetted so recently for attorney general also makes it practical for the president to nominate her in relatively short order.”
Other potential contenders that NBC News reports as likely being on the president’s shortlist for the SCOTUS pick include D.C. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan, Judge Paul Watford, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Patricia Millett, and U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Merrick Garland.
Why Is Lynch A Problem for Republicans?
Hoisting Lynch to the top of the president’s shortlist would post a huge problem for the GOP. This is especially true considering they’ve gone so far as to say that President Obama “isn’t allowed” to nominate a replacement in his last year – something that Republicans simply made up.
Not only did they recently confirm her as the U.S. Attorney General, but Lynch’s prosecution history makes her perfect for the job. Lynch’s record also makes it almost impossible for the GOP to point to her as “excessively liberal.”
It’s obvious the current crop of senators believes Lynch is qualified; otherwise, they would not have confirmed her for the office she holds now. Additionally, considering she was confirmed only recently, her qualifications and history are largely the same as they were during the initial confirmation.
In short, there’s no reason the Senate couldn’t confirm Lynch – except of course if they were simply obstructing the president or being racist, as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested recently.
Goldstein said if Senatorial Republicans – and Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell specifically – refused to allow Lynch’s nomination be heard, it would be more than problematic for them “during an election year.” But not just because of her moderate record.
In effect, refusing to grant even a hearing to Lynch could be perceived as racist – something most of the American electorate already believes of the GOP as a whole. What could be perceived as more openly racist than refusing to hold a hearing for the person who would be the first African American woman nominated to the Supreme Court of the United States?
Sure, Senate Republicans could hear her nomination, vote, and reject her, but given their history – and her qualifications – rejecting her would simply prove to the American people they’ve been lying all along, and that the Republicans are just as racist as people believe they are – which would ruin their chances for reelection.
With 34 senate seats up for grabs in 2016, 24 of which are currently held by Republicans, that’s a perception they simply cannot afford.
Featured Image by Richard Gillin, Angel Schatz, and Milos Milosevic via Flickr/CC by 2.0 and SA-2.0
