A health disaster, an economic slump, racial tensions: the backdrop to the presidential election of November 3 was already grim. To this is now added a war of succession for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States which promises to throw two irreconcilable Americas front against front.
The death of Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the age of 87, Friday, September 18, swept away by pancreatic cancer, had been feared for months by the Democratic camp, which held its breath with each hospitalization of the progressive dean of the most high legal body of the country.
Donald Trump had made this prospect a campaign argument by assuring ten days ago, to mobilize his base, that his re-election would make it possible to profoundly modify his balances, the two oldest judges having been appointed by Bill Clinton, there has a quarter of a century. Five of those judges appointed for life were chosen by Republican presidents, the other four by Democrats.
Hostilities launched as soon as the news is known
The news of the death of this figure in the struggle for women’s rights, who has become an icon on the left, plunged one part of the country in dismay while the other exulted at the prospect of anchoring the Supreme Court even further to right. Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Kentucky), master of the agenda, launched hostilities as soon as the news was heard. “We promised to work with the president [Donald] Trump and support his platform, including his remarkable choices for federal judgeships. Once again, we will keep our promise. President Trump’s candidate will be entitled to a vote in the United States Senate “, he assured in a statement.
Never in American history has a judge promised to such a position been appointed so close to a presidential election. The latest precedent, the brutal death of Conservative judge Antonin Scalia in February 2016, had prompted a completely different reaction from the same Mitch McConnell. Because the president was then a Democrat, Barack Obama, he estimated that eight months from the end of his second term, the latter lacked the necessary legitimacy. He had therefore refused to organize the slightest vote on the chosen person, Merrick Garland, president of the prestigious Court of Appeal of the District of Columbia. He had preferred to force the Supreme Court to stand still, divided into two blocks of four judges, rather than take the risk of Republican defections.
You have 62.9% of this article to read. The rest is for subscribers only.
