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?
May 13, 2026 1:55 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
Efficiently combating poverty
This essay won firstplace in the essay contest of the Acton Institute’s 2020 Poverty Cure Summit, which took place on Nov. 18-19, 2020. This essay is presented as it was submitted. – Ed. Eradicating poverty, or at least effectively reducing it, is one of the oldest and most debated issues in the field of economics. Several solutions have already been presented and yet the problem persists in many places. The specificity of each region of the globe makes it even...
John Paul II on work, socialism, and liberalism
This year marks the 30th anniversary of John Paul II’s important encyclical, Centesimus Annus. While the average lay person might not pay attention to formal pronouncements by the Roman Catholic Church, papal encyclicals are significant in their affirmation of the church’s social doctrine. Of course, Protestants have no such magisterium to which they might appeal, and it goes without saying that there exists no such thing as “Protestant social teaching.” Given the importance of the Christian church’s unity and its...
How global leaders used COVID-19 to restrict religious liberty
From violating burial rites to blame-shifting toward religious minorities to anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, the pandemic has served as a precursor to all sorts of anti-religious mischief. A new report from the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedoms shows how religious freedoms have been curtailed across the world. Read More… COVID-19 has posed unique challenges to religious liberty across the United States, spurring politicians to impose public health measures that restricted in-person worship services. Globally, the situation has often been much...
A silver lining in the Golden State’s school shutdowns
What happens in California doesn’t tend to stay in California – and that’s usually bad for America. For instance, “55% of all public school students, including those in charter schools, were at home, in distance learning, as of April 30, according to an EdSource analysis of new data released by the state.” However, a new and growing parental rights movement in the state is making headlines, creating change, and forging a national push for the nation’s still-shuttered schools to reopen...
Sen. Tim Scott’s message of redemption resonates
Our weakened state, due to original sin, does not mean that we are wicked, evil, or insignificant. It means that we have a wound—a particular kind of wound that demands a particular kind of medicine. Read More… In his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Biden offered a renewed vision of America, claiming a revitalizing economy, a growing distribution of vaccinations, and efforts to end injustice against race and gender identity. His e through hollow as many...
The ‘man of public spirit’: Politics as art, not science
Politicians have given us many occasions to be critical of their actions. Politics, like all sausage making, is rarely palatable. Nevertheless, Aristotle observed that man is by nature a political animal, drawn into association with others in order to satisfy inherently social needs. Politics need not take the form of what Ambrose Bierce calls it in The Devil’s Dictionary: “a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.” Of course, thinking about politics clearly and constructively is often made...
Examining the moral basis of Pope Francis’ pleas for financial regulation – and the morality of ‘speculation’
As Pope Francis recognizes, speculation is part-and-parcel of the modern economic world. He also plainly believes that it is subject to the demands of morality and justice. The question thus es: How do we judge whether any act of speculation is right and just, or wrong and unjust? Read More… In his Prayer Intentions for May 2021, Pope Francis is asking that Catholics pray for strict regulation of financial markets to protect the poor. But is strict government oversight what...
Why a baby boom would be good for the environment
If it is true that we face unprecedented and unforeseen challenges when es to environmental catastrophe and deprivation, don’t we need more creativity, more ingenuity and more initiative to pioneer a proper path forward? These are features of civilization e from having more humans. Read More… It’s e fashionable for doomsday prophets to predict that “overpopulation” will lead to mass starvation and environmental catastrophe. Now, however, with humanity facing a global crash in birthrates, many experts are rightly changing their...
Biden’s ‘stimulus’ for a growing economy is all about central control
President Biden wants to pump nearly $2 trillion more into the U.S. economy under the guise of “economic stimulus.” But the country’s economy has already been growing for months, proving that American politicians have adopted the term “stimulus” for a new regime of spending programs that drive up debt needlessly, taking a page out of Xi Jinping playbook. Read More… Proposals for “economic stimulus”, the use of monetary or fiscal policy to stimulate the economy, have e a permanent fixture...
Finding meaning in work: Christian vocation means working with ‘holy intent’
For those who are lost and looking for meaning in a fragmented world – constantly torn between idols of work and leisure, with little left in between – “the power of holy intent” orients our hearts and hands beyond ourselves. It focuses our worship on the Worker and Creator who made us in his image and likeness. It reminds us that, whether we recognize it or not, he is the one we are truly working for. Read More… America’s new...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved