GOP White House hopefuls get Supreme Court spotlight

The Supreme Court fight is lending a spotlight to a group of Republicans viewed as harboring White House ambitions, injecting the potential for GOP jockeying into the judicial nomination.  

The Republican shadow war could spill into public view next week when Judge Ketanji Brown JacksonKetanji Brown JacksonThe Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Will Russia use chemical weapons? GOP raises red flag on Supreme Court nominee’s Guantánamo work  Photos of the Week: Ketanji Brown-Jackson and Sen. Booker, ‘Zelensky Way’ and many sheep MORE appears for three days before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a hearing on her nomination, where she’ll face two days of questions from senators on the panel. A fourth day will involve outside experts and witnesses.  

“That usually doesn’t bode well,” said Sen. John CornynJohn CornynThe Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Will Russia use chemical weapons? GOP raises red flag on Supreme Court nominee’s Guantánamo work  Capito eyes Senate GOP leadership bid MORE (R-Texas), a member of the panel, when asked about having presidential hopefuls on the committee, adding that it becomes a “platform” for others.  

“I can’t control what other people do. All I can do is try to control myself. That could be a factor, but in the end, I don’t expect it to change the result,” he added.  

The Judiciary Committee has a handful of GOP senators seen as likely White House contenders if former President TrumpDonald TrumpTrump: I am not using campaign funds for new plane Do not be fueled: How investing in renewables can save the world and neutralize modern Russia Wife of Clarence Thomas says she attended Jan. 6 ‘Stop the Steal’ rally MORE backs down from his flirtation with running in 2024 or further down the line.  

GOP Sens. Ted CruzRafael (Ted) Edward CruzGOP senators ramp up pressure on Biden to scrap Iran talks  Texas congressional candidate launches PAC to boost other GOP candidates Photos of the Week: Ketanji Brown-Jackson and Sen. Booker, ‘Zelensky Way’ and many sheep MORE (Texas), who previously ran for president, Josh HawleyJoshua (Josh) David HawleyPolitico demands Hawley stop using Jan. 6 photo on campaign mug GOP raises red flag on Supreme Court nominee’s Guantánamo work  The Memo: Get ready for Biden vs. Trump all over again MORE (Mo.) and Tom CottonTom Bryant CottonOvernight Defense & National Security — Senators grill Biden officials on Ukraine Lawmakers press intel officials over possible Russian chemical, nuclear attacks GOP demands delay vote on spending, Ukraine aid MORE (Ark.) are each on the committee. As part of the hearing, they’ll be able to provide both an opening statement, previewing their focus for the hearing, as well as go one-on-one with Jackson during a question-and-answer period.  

Sen. Ben SasseBen SasseGOP raises red flag on Supreme Court nominee’s Guantánamo work  GOP senators grill intel chiefs for not sending fighter jets to Ukraine Zelensky calls on Congress to implement no-fly zone, block purchases of Russian oil MORE (R-Neb.) and Marsha BlackburnMarsha BlackburnGOP demands delay vote on spending, Ukraine aid The damnable religious inklings of the Big Tech libertarian Trump holds GOP candidate forum at Mar-a-Lago MORE (R-Tenn.), who have been floated as having bigger political ambitions, are also on the Judiciary Committee.  

The potential for fireworks comes as Republicans have pledged to keep the Supreme Court hearing “dignified” and civil, a dig at Democrats who largely opposed Trump’s Supreme Court nominees. Most, if not all, Republicans on the committee are expected to oppose Jackson’s nomination. 

Democrats boycotted the Judiciary Committee vote on Amy Coney BarrettAmy Coney BarrettKetanji Brown Jackson’s judicial superpower: An appreciation of the human consequences of court rulings Susan Collins praises Biden’s Supreme Court pick after meeting Key GOP senator warns against ‘arbitrary timeline’ for court nominee MORE’s Supreme Court nomination, though that didn’t prevent Republicans from moving forward with her. And the Supreme Court nomination of Brett KavanaughBrett Michael KavanaughKetanji Brown Jackson’s judicial superpower: An appreciation of the human consequences of court rulings Graham signals he’s a likely ‘no’ on Biden SCOTUS pick Supreme Court denies GOP requests to halt new maps in NC, Pennsylvania MORE descended into vitriol after he faced sexual assault allegations, which he denied.  

Sen. Chuck GrassleyChuck GrassleyGOP raises red flag on Supreme Court nominee’s Guantánamo work  GOP demands delay vote on spending, Ukraine aid Susan Collins praises Biden’s Supreme Court pick after meeting MORE (Iowa), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said that the presidential aspirations of some senators wouldn’t affect the overall tenor of the hearing. 

“Not at all,” Grassley said about the potential impact. “We’re going to do what every Republican should do and every Democrat should do. We’re going to have a thorough and fair hearing, and we’re not going to get into the gutter like the Democrats did on Kavanaugh.”  

Sen. Dick DurbinDick DurbinGOP raises red flag on Supreme Court nominee’s Guantánamo work  Senate gets deal for quick vote on funding, Ukraine aid Sanders calls for end to MLB antitrust exemption MORE (D-Ill.), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, added that the potential political jockeying was a fact of life for the panel.  

“I live with that reality every time I convene the Senate Judiciary Committee — the aspirations of my colleagues,” Durbin said.  

But Durbin added that he was encouraged by Republicans who have met with Jackson and “came away with a positive impression.”

“I’m encouraged by the fact that Sen. [Mitch] McConnell [Ky.] and other Republican leaders have said that they want to make sure that she’s treated with respect,” Durbin said. 

It would hardly be the first time presidential politics intersected with a Supreme Court hearing.

In 2018, during Kavanaugh’s hearing, the panel included Democratic Sens. Amy KlobucharAmy KlobucharGraham says he would back no fly zone in Ukraine if Russia uses chemical weapons Klobuchar says don’t rule out sending US fighter planes to Poland Bipartisan group of senators to meet with officials, visit refugee sites in Poland MORE (Minn.), Kamala HarrisKamala HarrisManchin to oppose Biden Fed pick over climate stances Bipartisan group of senators to meet with officials, visit refugee sites in Poland Putin or peace? International economics rather than law may dictate the answer MORE (Calif.) and Cory BookerCory BookerTo build for the future, we need updated rainfall records Bipartisan group of senators press Mayorkas on US readiness for Russian cyberthreat Senate Democrats ‘deeply disappointed’ in Biden administration’s decision to keep Trump-era rule MORE (N.J.), who were each considered to be potential 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls.  

Cornyn pointed back to Kavanaugh’s hearing, saying that it “seemed to have an impact on the way they approached the hearing.”  

Harris, who was the then-vice presidential nominee, also took part in Barrett’s hearing, putting a spotlight on the questions she asked Barrett.  

Jackson went before the Judiciary Committee last year for her appeals court nomination, giving a potential preview of how Republicans will approach next week’s hearing.  

Cotton asked Jackson about if she had ever represented a Guantánamo Bay detainee and asked her if the case was assigned to her. Jackson said that it was.  

He also submitted more than 20 follow-up questions, including a dive into Jackson’s work on the Sentencing Commission.  

Cotton will meet with Jackson this week, while Hawley and Cruz met with her last week.  

Cruz, in a tweet after his closed-door meeting with Jackson, vowed that he would “continue to scrutinize her record carefully to ensure that she, if confirmed, would hold firmly to the principles of the Constitution.”

Cruz also submitted more than 30 follow-up questions for Jackson as part of her hearing for her appeals court position, including asking her broadly about her judicial philosophy, if she supported expanding the Supreme Court, her views on free speech and if she believed Kavanaugh assaulted Christine Blasey Ford.  

Hawley, meanwhile, pledged to use his time before the committee to dive into both specific positions including her previous work related to Guantánamo Bay detainees, but also broader questions about her judicial philosophy.

“I think the hearings will be very, very substantive,” Hawley said. 

“Certainly, her record on criminal law as it relates to detainees … we’re going to need to get, I think, some more clarity on that,” Hawley added. “I mean, we visited about it for some time. Certainly, it’s something that I think that I and I imagine others will want to talk about.”