Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: Can the president appoint a Supreme Court justice during an election year?
Explainer: Can the president appoint a Supreme Court justice during an election year?
Apr 19, 2026 8:23 PM

President Donald Trump has decided to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat left by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just weeks before the 2020 election. Does he have the legal and constitutional power to do so? What if he loses the election? What have other presidents done? And what about the “Biden” or “Thurmond” Rule? Here are the facts you need to know.

Does the president have the power to appoint a Supreme Court justice in his final year?

The president retains his full constitutional powers until the moment he leaves office. The Appointments Clause (Article II, Section 2) of the U.S. Constitution says the president “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court.”

Is mon for a Supreme Court justice to be nominated or confirmed during the final year of a president’s term?

Presidents have nominated a candidate to the Supreme Court 31 times during an election year or after an election but before the inauguration. Presidents acted 29 times to fill an existing Supreme Court seat. According to The Washington Post, “one-third of all presidents have appointed a Supreme Court justice in an election year.”

Can a Supreme Court justice be confirmed during a lame-duck session?

Yes; several have been. (See the next question.) However, the vote count and political calculus could change markedly. In addition to general public backlash against outgoing politicians making major decisions, Senate Republicans’ 53-47 majority may be threatened. Two Republicans, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, have said they will not vote on a Supreme Court justice before the election. That still leaves the GOP enough votes to proceed to a vote. However, if Mark Kelly defeats appointed Senator Martha McSally of Arizona, state law dictates that “the person elected shall fill the remaining unexpired term of the vacated office.” Kelly could be sworn in by November 30 and take part in the lame-duck session. The new Senate will be sworn in on January 3, 2021, and the Senate could act until Trump leaves office on January 20. Vice President Mike Pence could break a 50-50 tie.

Can the president appoint a Supreme Court justice if he loses the election?

Yes. A total of five U.S. Supreme Court justices have been confirmed after a presidential election by a lame-duck president who lost the election (Adams, Van Buren, Benjamin Harrison) or did not run (Washington, Tyler). Four additional outgoing, lame-duck presidents tried unsuccessfully to place their nominees on the Supreme Court between the election and the inauguration (J.Q. Adams, Filmore, Hayes, Buchanan). Rutherford B. Hayes nominated Stanley Matthews to the bench three month after James A. Garfield won the 1880 presidential election, but the Senate took no action. Garfield renominated Matthews, who was subsequently confirmed by one vote – the slimmest margin in Supreme Court history.

Although he does not exactly fit the criteria, Justice Stephen Breyer began his ascent to the Supreme Court when President Jimmy Carter nominated him to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on November 13, 1980 – nine days after Carter lost a 44-state landslide to Ronald Reagan. The Senate confirmed Breyer on December 9, 1980.

Were any of these justices consequential to American jurisprudence?

The longest-serving Chief Justice in Supreme Court history, John Marshall, was nominated after John Adams lost the 1800 presidential election but before the House of Representatives broke the Electoral College tie between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr. Marshall established the doctrine of judicial review – the legal notion that the Supreme Court has the power to decide whether a government action is constitutional – in Marbury v. Madison (1803). (Adams’ son, John Quincy Adams, would also nominate a justice after losing the 1828 election to Andrew Jackson, but the Senate did not vote on the matter.) But as part of the most elite legal fraternity in the judicial profession, all justices are consequential.

Which president nominated a justice to the Supreme Court latest in his term?

President Andrew Jackson nominated Justice John Catron to a new seat on the Supreme Court in March 3, 1837 – Jackson’s last full day in office and two days before Martin Van Buren’s inauguration. The Senate confirmed Catron five days after the nomination.

What is the “Biden Rule”? Does it prevent an election-year SCOTUS appointment?

The “Biden Rule” is not a formal Senate rule or norm. In a speech delivered on the Senate floor on June 25, 1992, then-Senator Biden responded to rumors that Justice Harry Blackmun’s retirement was imminent. Since confirmation hearings during the heat of an election would bring only “partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties,” Biden suggested that “if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not – and not – name a nominee until after the November election pleted.” (As noted, this is not the norm.) If he did, “the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over,” presumably during the lame-duck session. In 2016, as Biden stumped for the confirmation of Merrick Garland, he said his words applied only to an “extreme candidate” (like Clarence Thomas), and the Biden rule “doesn’t exist.” And on September 20, 2020, Biden said that “Majority Leader [Mitch] McConnell made up” a “new rule, the McConnell rule,” which is “based on the fiction that I somehow believe there should be no nomination to the court in an election year. That’s ridiculous.” Its author apparently does not believe the Biden Rule is binding precedent.

What is the “Thurmond Rule”?

The Thurmond Rule is harder to pin down and less relevant. It is said to hold that judicial nominations to lower courts – and not the Supreme Court – should slow down after June, or March, of a presidential election year. In 1980, Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., reportedly advocated for Senate Republicans to delay President Carter’s judicial appointments; however, most of the nominees in question received a vote within a week and, as noted, the Senate confirmed Stephen Breyer in the lame-duck session. The rate of lower-court judicial confirmations in presidential elections fell dramatically following the bruising confirmation hearings of Judge Robert Bork (from 71% in 1984 to 44% in 1988). “The Thurmond rule neither is a rule nor can it be attributed to the late Senator Strom Thurmond,” said former Sen. Orrin Hatch. Then-Sen. Jeff Sessions said more forcefully: “It is a myth. It does not exist.”

Has an election-year Supreme Court appointment ever affected a presidential election?

In 1916, Woodrow Wilson appointed John Clarke to replace Charles Evans Hughes – who resigned to accept the Republican presidential nomination to challenge Wilson. (Wilson narrowly defeated Hughes. Herbert Hoover reappointed Hughes to the court as Chief Justice in 1930 – to replace former President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft.)

Can a president make a temporary “recess appointment” to the Supreme Court?

Yes. The president could appoint a recess appointment to the Supreme Court if the Senate goes into recess at least 10 days, underNational Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning (2014). The appointment could last no longer than the end of the next session without formal Senate confirmation. President Dwight Eisenhower made three recess appointments to the Supreme Court – Earl Warren, William Brennan, and Potter Stewart – all of whom were subsequently confirmed.

Is there enough time to confirm a justice to the Supreme Court before the election or the end of his term?

Since Robert Bork, a Supreme Court nominee has received a vote an average of 30 calendar days after his or her Senate confirmation hearings begin. There are 39 days between Monday, September 28, and election day. However, the average time between a Supreme Court justice’s nomination and confirmation is 76 calendar days (including recesses), making this a remarkably tight timeframe for a modern nominee. For more information, see, “Explainer: Is there enough time to confirm a Supreme Court nominee before the election?”

Would confirming a Supreme Court justice this close to a presidential election trigger a backlash?

Democrats have promised that. Sen. Chuck Schumer has said if Democrats take take the majority, “everything is on the table.” Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., suggested, “When Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court.” Legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin also proposed retaliating by granting statehood to Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico.

However, Democratic leaders had proposed all of these steps before there was a Supreme Court vacancy. During his speech at Congressman John Lewis’ funeral on July 30, former President Barack Obama encouraged his fellow Democrats to begin “ending the filibuster,” calling it a “Jim Crow relic”; and to grant “equal representation in our government” to Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. Last June, Democratic presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg proposed expanding the Supreme Court to 15 seats.

What factors should Senators consider when voting to confirm a Supreme Court nominee during an election year?

Senators confirming a nominee to the Supreme Court during an election year should consider the same criteria as they would during any confirmation hearing: Senators should judge a Supreme Court nominee by his or her fidelity to the U.S. Constitution as interpreted through the original intent of those who wrote its venerable text.

Press / Evan Vucci.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Midnight Mass: There is no feast on a fast
What begins with a surprisingly positive portrayal of Catholic church life among the faithful ends in all-too-familiar Hollywood territory. Is this the best we can hope for? Read More… Near the beginning of the Netflix series Midnight Mass, released in late 2021, an Ash Wednesday service is faithfully plete with a young priest’s effective and moving sermon, explaining the ashes as “a smudge of death, of ash, of sin—for repentance—because of where this is all heading, which is Easter. Rebirth,...
Natural law is human law
The abilities to know truth and choose the good are gifts of our reason. They are natural to us and make us fully human. Read More… Perhaps the most confusing aspect of natural law is the phrase itself: “natural law.” For many people, the word “natural” implies human biology or the physical environment. For others, it means “instinct.” Likewise, when some people hear the word “law,” it implies “constraint” or obedience to legislation, regulations, and codes decreed by institutions with...
The good news of your God-given limits
Instead of finding ways to do more and more, we should view our limitations as God’s gift so we know always to rely on him. Faithfulness is more important than great success by worldly standards. Read More… I love productivity books. I’ve read all the big classics on the subject, from Stephen Covey’s Seven Habits of Highly Effective People to Cal Newport’s Deep Work. I am a devotee of David Allen’s productivity ur-text, Getting Things Done. That book, in a...
Does anyone care who John Galt is anymore?
March 6 marks the 40th anniversary of the death of Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged and creator of the Objectivist philosophy. Her novels still sell, but are her ideas still taken seriously? Were they ever? Read More… If it had not been for the railroads, I would never have gotten beyond the first chapter ofAtlas Shrugged. Having had a vague idea of what Ayn Rand believed in, I was pleasantly surprised to find that the story depended so heavily...
A new documentary on the life of Kurt Vonnegut is unstuck in time
This year we celebrate the centenary of the birth of one of the most popular American novelists of the 20th century. Does a documentary shot by a friend do the author of Slaughterhouse-Five justice? Read More… What would Kurt Vonnegut have made of the accordion-style cycle of lockdowns and other restraints imposed on us by the seemingly permanent American sanitary dictatorship devoted to the religion of health in this the centenary year of his birth? Would he have joined the...
Justin Trudeau’s political overreach is a greater threat to liberty than the truckers’ protest
When citizens’ right to peaceful protest and redress of grievances is treated as the equivalent of war by their government, everyone should be terrified. Read More… The mask has been torn off. If anyone had any doubts that some governments will do literally anything to suppress anyone who protests what they regard as unreasonable measures by the state to address the COVID pandemic, events in Canada has surely disabused them of such illusions. In times of war, we generally allow...
Oscar winner Guillermo del Toro’s Nightmare Alley is a dead end
It was supposed to shine a light on American susceptibility to con men and demagoguery. Instead, this Oscar-nominated film is strangely clueless about its own self-deception. Read More… Guillermo del Toro won Best Picture and Best Director Oscars for The Shape Of Water (2017), a movie infamous for a leading lady so desperate for intimacy that she makes love to a fish, probably the best metaphor for the ongoing moral collapse of the women who like such movies. It was...
Christianity is the world’s most persecuted religion, confirms new report
A list of the world’s worst state actors when es to religious persecution is out, and Christians are suffering terribly for their faith around the world. Christians in the West should be concerned but also grateful that what they put up with from secularists is nothing like persecution on this scale. Read More… The group Open Doors USAfigures that 360 million Christians last year lived in countries where persecution was “significant.” Roughly 5,600 Christians were murdered, more than 6,000 were...
Licorice Pizza is the L.A. fairy tale we didn’t know we needed
Filmmaker Paul Thomas Anderson has managed the impossible: a love story wise as serpents but innocent as doves. And no sex! Read More… My series on cinematic nostalgia continues—after Wes Anderson’s Francophilia, Ridley Scott’s Italian farce, and Spielberg’s Puerto Rican fiasco, here’s a California story: Paul Thomas Anderson’s ninth feature film, Licorice Pizza, the only Hollywood movie made last year with some reason to be remembered. It’s a story about the ’70s, Hollywood, and the confusion of love in post-’60s...
Canon law, works of mercy, and human dignity
The gains made in fort by modernity still leave room for ancient wisdom and ancient law. In fact, they demand them. Read More… “All human societies face about the same problems,” claim David Friedman, Peter Leeson, and David Skarbek in their fascinating and peculiar book Legal Systems Very Different from Ours. “They deal with them in an interesting variety of different ways. All of them are grownups—there is little reason to believe that the people who created the legal systems...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved