Photo shows the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 12, 2020. /Xinhua
Editor's note: Andrew Korybko is a Moscow-based American political analyst. The article reflects the author's opinion, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.
2020 will go down in history as the year in which many Americans radically reconceptualized almost everything about their country. The COVID-19 pandemic, Antifa-Black Lives Matter unrest, and Justice Ginsburg's passing are among the most impactful events in at least a generation.
They prompt a serious rethinking about the government's economic responsibility to its citizens, racial relations, and the influence of the Supreme Court in shaping U.S. socio-politics across the coming decades.
The first two events have already been discussed at length over the past few months whereas the last-mentioned has only just recently entered the public discourse and is the focus of this article.
Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett as Justice Ginsburg's replacement stands to be perhaps the most lasting domestic element of his controversial legacy.
The conservative mother of seven's confirmation to the highest court of the land would give conservatives a 6-3 super majority not seen since the 1930s.
Since Supreme Court justices usually remain on the bench for decades, it could result in such far-reaching transformations of American society as the overturning of Roe v. Wade and Obamacare, among many others that can't even be predicted at this point in time.
Most immediately, however, it could also ensure Trump's re-election if the upcoming election is ultimately decided by the Supreme Court like 2000's contentious one was. There are many scenarios for how this could happen, but right now it's the top worry for Democrats.
Reuters reported over the weekend that "U.S. Supreme Court nominee Barrett would have final say on recusal calls." This means that the Trump-picked nominee might choose to rule in favor of her political patron if the Republicans confirm her before the election as expected and she's soon thereafter compelled to hear a relevant case instead of declining to do so due to a perceived conflict of interests. Whether it involves mail-in ballots, state electors, or any other pertinent issue, her predictable decision in support of Trump would make history.
Notionally conservative Justice Roberts is regarded as a swing voter in the Supreme Court's current 5-4 majority, which is why Barrett's confirmation before the election and her subsequently speculated loyalty to Trump personally are so important for the incumbent in this context.
Preventing a deadlocked 4-4 decision is significant in so far as granting more legitimacy to the Supreme Court's potential ruling on election-related issues instead of automatically leaving lower court rulings in place like would happen in that scenario.
File photo of Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative federal appellate judge that U.S. President Donald Trump announces on September 26, 2020. /Xinhua
Returning back to the introductory paragraph of this article, the backdrop against which this speculation is occurring is the arguably unprecedented socio-political transformation of America that's perceived by many as being favorable to Democrat causes.
That's why this party's supporters fear that Trump might try to steal the election in order to remain in office, though Republicans are worried that the Democrats are the ones trying to do so if they narrowly lose but decide to play dirty in order to prevent Trump's second term in office.
It's because of both parties' suspicions of one another and many Americans' uncertainty about the legitimacy of the results that everyone is expecting the Supreme Court to be the final arbiter in this historic election.
Barrett's confirmation would almost certainly guarantee that the judicial branch rules in favor of the incumbent, which could lead to claims by the Democrats and especially their de-facto political militias of Antifa and Black Lives Matter that the will of the people was stolen by the controversial rule of America's judges.
Cynically speaking, it won't matter much whether this is truly the case or not since all that's important in that context is that such a narrative is propagated in order to de-legitimize the results in the eyes of practically half the country.
It can even be argued that the current controversy – whether justified or not – surrounding Barrett's expected confirmation serves this role (be it unintentionally or otherwise). For this reason, observers can likely expect political turmoil if any election-related case reaches the Supreme Court in the coming months.
(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)