You’ll Never Believe It, but Mitch McConnell Is Already Threatening to Block Biden’s SCOTUS Pick

There aren’t a lot of things you can count on in life, but one thing on which you definitely can, with the consistency of the most Swiss of Swiss watches, is Mitch McConnell blocking Democratic presidents’ agendas just to be a dick. While even the worst people in Washington typically have something that motivates them beyond their own power, the Kentucky lawmaker really and truly does not. “Give up,” someone who knows McConnell well told The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer when she set out to find “the larger principles or sense of purpose that animates” the senator. “You can look and look for something more in him, but it isn’t there. I wish I could tell you that there is some secret thing that he really believes in, but he doesn’t.” McConnell, of course, spent eight years obstructing Barack Obama’s agenda—including a Supreme Court seat that could have helped tipped the balance for the liberal wing of the bench—and less than four months into Joe Biden’s first term, he told reporters, “One hundred percent of my focus is standing up to this administration.”

So really, it comes as absolutely no surprise whatsoever that even though he more than likely can’t do anything about it, McConnell is already out there suggesting he’s not going to let Biden’s (yet-to-be-named) pick to replace Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court go through. In a statement issued Thursday, the Senate minority leader warned that Biden had best not nominate someone too ideological (like, y’know, a number of the conservative justices already on the court), or there’d be consequences. “The American people elected a Senate that is evenly split at 50-50,” McConnell said. “To the degree that President Biden received a mandate, it was to govern from the middle, steward our institutions, and unite America. The president must not outsource this important decision to the radical left. The American people deserve a nominee with demonstrated reverence for the written text of our laws and our Constitution.”

For his part, Biden has reiterated his vow to nominate the first Black woman to the Court, a demographic that, on its own, McConnell apparently thinks suggests radical politics. (Here’s where we remind that, earlier this month, the senator suggested that Black people aren’t Americans.) But can he actually do anything about it? Unlike in the case of Merrick Garland, McConnell is no longer in charge of the Senate. But as we’ve seen over the course of Biden’s first 12 months in office, that’s done little to stop Republicans (with the help of two Democratic senators) from attempting to thwart, sometimes successfully, everything the president wants to get done on behalf of the country. According to The New York Times, on Thursday there was “talk that by withholding a quorum for voting on a nominee, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee could block a vote,” though the idea seemed unlikely given that it could lead Democrats to “unite around a rules change to bring the nominee to the floor.” Worryingly, though, that’s not their only option:

If Republicans join in opposition to his nominee, Mr. Biden will need the support of all 50 Democratic and independent senators to win her confirmation, and if Mr. McConnell labels the president’s pick “radical,” it could ratchet up pressure on the party’s centrists to withhold their backing.

One potential object of a pressure campaign would be Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Democrat of Arizona, whose positions so far have helped block a far-reaching voting rights bill and stymie a social safety net and climate change measure.

While the Times notes that Sinema “has been relatively liberal on Supreme Court nominees,” if the last year has taught us anything, it’s that we should never underestimate her (and Joe Manchin’s) commitment to screwing over the party. Referring to Democrats’ experience with Garland, Judiciary Committee member Senator Richard Blumenthal warned Thursday, “We need to be ready and willing to fight, and fight ferociously.”

Meanwhile, in other unsurprising news, conservative gadflies are unenthused about a Black woman joining the Supreme Court. In a series of since-deleted tweets, former Cato Institute director Ilya Shapiro wrote: “Objectively best pick for Biden is Sri Srinivasan, who is solid prog and v smart. Even has identity politics benefit of being first Asian (Indian) American. But alas doesn’t fit into last intersectionality hierarchy so we’ll get lesser black woman. Thank heaven for small favors? Because Biden said he’s only consider [sic] black women for SCOTUS, his nominee will always have an asterisk attached. Fitting that the Court takes up affirmative action next term.” Then he charmingly followed that commentary up with a Twitter poll asking, “Is Joe Biden racist and sexist for saying his Supreme Court nominee will be a black woman?” (After the inevitable blowback—and blasting by his new employer—Shapiro called his words “inartful.”) Tucker Carlson has, of course, railed against the notion of a Black woman joining the Court on his show, while the National Review claimed the president has “disqualified dozens of liberal and progressive jurists for no reason other than their race and gender. This is not a great start in selecting someone sworn to provide equal justice under the law.” Strangely, no one on the right seems to remember that Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan both promised to nominate women to the Court, and while we would never dare suggest their issue now is over the “Black” in “Black woman,” some less generous people might.

If you would like to receive the Levin Report in your inbox daily, click here to subscribe.