Progressive activists want Hillary Clinton to build a Supreme Court with justices that bring political experience as elected officials or candidates for public office, unlike any justice sitting on the Court now.
Liberals may be conflicted about whether Clinton should seek to confirm Judge Merrick Garland if Clinton is elected president. But progressives share a similar view on the type of justices they want Clinton to consider nominating if elected.
Democracy for America, which first supported Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential bid before endorsing Clinton, believes President Obama made a poor strategic decision by picking Garland. Neil Sroka, the group’s communications director, said if Clinton wins then Democracy of America hopes she “swings for the fences” and picks an African American woman.
“In addition to having an opportunity to break the glass ceiling here by nominating the first African American woman, there’s also real value in putting up someone that doesn’t just have experience in the world of jurisprudence,” Sroka said. “Someone with elected experience, running for office, could I think provide the Court some really unique insights to what it means to be a candidate in the 21st century and could be a useful frame of reference.”
Sroka said he’s concerned that the Court is “overwhelmingly white” and “overwhelmingly male” and hopes Clinton would seek to rectify that.
Caroline Fredrickson, the American Constitution Society president, said she sees much value in Clinton choosing to pursue Garland’s confirmation. If or when Clinton would need to nominate others to the Court, Fredrickson said Clinton would do well to look for someone with a political background.
“I think actually the Court is long overdue to have some more diversity of experience in its ranks, including people who have served in political capacities or people who’ve actually had experience representing individual human beings, which is sorely lacking right now on this particular Court,” Fredrickson said.
One reason why progressives are interested in Clinton selecting a Court nominee with political experience is because of the goals they hope a liberal-dominated Supreme Court would accomplish. A justice who has run for or held public office may help undo the Citizens United decision that removed barriers to political spending, Sroka reasoned.
Neither Fredrickson nor Sroka would name specific individuals who they would like to see on the Court, but several names speculated to be on Clinton’s shortlist have political experience. Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and New Jersey Sen. Corey Booker are rumored to be on Clinton’s shortlist, according to The Hill.
Clinton, for her part, has provided few details about who she’s eyeing for the Court’s vacancy. In an appearance on the “Tom Joyner Morning Show” earlier this month, Clinton indicated she would not be bound by Obama’s nomination of Garland.
“If I have the opportunity to make any Supreme Court appointments, I’m going to look broadly and widely for people who represent the diversity of our country and bring some common sense, real world experience,” Clinton said.
Clinton’s political opponent, GOP nominee Donald Trump, has used the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death as a selling point to corral disaffected conservatives. Trump snagged Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s support on Friday in part by floating a new list of potential Supreme Court picks. Cruz cited the inclusion of Utah Sen. Mike Lee on the list as chief among his reasons to vote for Trump, even though Lee has indicated he’s not interested in the job.
If Clinton provides details about her Supreme Court shortlist, it could serve to motivate her progressive base to mobilize for Election Day. But it could also turn off disaffected, anti-Trump Republicans that she has courted since Trump earned the GOP presidential nomination.
The issue of the Supreme Court may take center stage when the two candidates meet in New York for the first presidential debate on Monday.
