Why Democrats probably won't boycott Supreme Court confirmation hearings

As Democrats try to beat the odds and prevent the confirmation of President Trump's Supreme Court nominee (almost certainly Amy Coney Barrett) before the November presidential election, some lawmakers and activists have suggested boycotting the Senate Judicary Committee hearings, which are tentatively scheduled for the middle of October. Just don't expect the idea to gain much traction, The Washington Post reports, especially among Democrats who sit on the committee.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) has said he will forego the standard courtesy visit, in which the nominee meets with senators individually, but he does intend to participate in the hearings and he believes "all my Judiciary colleagues will."

The risks of skipping out on the hearings seem to outweigh the potential reward, per the Post. If Democrats don't go, Republicans would likely move swiftly though the questioning and toward a committee vote.

The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.

Join more than 350,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with a selection of The Week’s most interesting, enlightening and entertaining stories - plus daily puzzles.

Sign up

More specifically, though, a boycott could prevent Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), who sits on the committee, from giving a jolt to her own vice presidential campaign, the Post notes. Harris, who is running alongside the Democratic nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden, has become well-known for her interrogations of Trump's nominees over the last few years, and there's a sense that she could enhance her ticket's chances during the hearings.

With all that in mind, it's more likely that Democrats will try to extend questioning as long as possible and make their case for why the nominee shouldn't be confirmed in a more traditional manner. Read more at The Washington Post.