The death of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia has left a void in the Supreme Court. With even numbers of liberal and conservative judges, the loss of Scalia, a conservative, could impact six major cases this coming year: abortion, contraception, unions, voting rights, affirmative action and immigration, according to The New York Times.

President Barack Obama has announced that he intends to nominate a justice to the Court during his last year of presidency.

To get some insight on what’s happening with the nomination process, The Daily Orange interviewed Margaret Susan Thompson, an associate professor of history and political science in Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, and Keith Bybee, a professor of political science and director of the Institute for the Study of the Judiciary, Politics, and the Media at SU.

The Daily Orange: Do you think Antonin Scalia’s position should be filled while Obama is still president? 

Keith Bybee: I do think the process should take place. The Constitution requires the president to nominate people for the Supreme Court when there’s a vacancy, and the Senate has a duty to provide advice and consent. That doesn’t mean the Senate necessarily has to approve who the president nominates, but I think the process should be initiated while Obama is president.

Margaret Susan Thompson: Yes, I do. A president is elected for four years, not three. … I find it interesting that people who declare themselves to be constitutionalists — people who believe in the literal word of the Constitution — are saying that a president should not exercise his constitutional powers, one of which is to nominate people to the Supreme Court. Yes, the Senate can vote them down, but the president has every right to name somebody.

The D.O.: If the position is filled before the next president takes office, how will it affect American politics?

K.B.: I think it’s number one, going to make the Supreme Court central to the presidential campaign. The Supreme Court is not often central to presidential campaigns — it’s at best a marginal issue. I think secondly, it’s going to solidify what has already been happening, which is an increasing political perception of the Supreme Court. So, by pulling the Supreme Court into the presidential election, this will make the Court appear ever more political.

M.S.T.: If it’s handled really badly by the Senate, and by that I mean people interpret their actions as being not based on anything that is appropriate to be considered, then it’s going to work against the Republicans. If President Obama were to deliberately name somebody who would be outrageously on the left, as a sort of “let me show you what I can do,” that would be equally problematic.

The D.O.: What will happen if the position isn’t filled until the next president takes office?

M.S.T.: If they wait for the next president to appoint a justice, we’re not talking January — it’s going to take a few months for whoever they nominate to be approved, so it’s really two years of Supreme Court cases that would be determined under these circumstances (four liberal and four conservative judges), and that’s unprecedented.

The D.O.: Of the nominees mentioned so far, who do you think would be chosen to fill the position?

K.B.: It’s so hard to say, I mean President Obama in his previous two nominations has given indications that he takes diversity very seriously, so it may very well be either a woman or a person of color. He also seems to be interested in someone who has an understanding of how less privileged Americans live, but beyond that it’s difficult to know who he’s going to pick.

M.S.T.: We don’t know. Right now it’s all purely speculation. If the president has any sense, which I think he does, he’s not going to name an extreme progressive candidate because that would just be adding fuel to the fire, but clearly he’s also not going to nominate a conservative.

Published on February 22, 2016 at 11:32 pm

Contact Caroline: cbarthol@syr.edu