The winner of the Arizona Senate race could be seated in time for a vote on a Supreme Court pick.

[mystery-ak]

By Glenn Thrush

    Published Sept. 18, 2020Updated Sept. 19, 2020, 12:15 a.m. ET

If Mark Kelly, the Democratic nominee for Senate in Arizona, unseats Senator Martha McSally, a Republican who was appointed to her seat and began serving last year, he could be sworn in as early as Nov. 30 — possibly in time to vote on a new Supreme Court nominee, elections experts said.

Hypothetically, that would narrow the Republicans’ 53-to-47 majority in the upper chamber, which may become relevant if a vote on a replacement for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was delayed until a lame-duck session after the election.

The Arizona race is technically a special election. The state’s Republican governor appointed Ms. McSally to the seat after she was defeated by Kyrsten Sinema, a Democrat, in a closely contested Senate race in 2018.

Mr. Kelly, a former astronaut and the husband of former Representative Gabrielle Giffords, has maintained a steady lead over Ms. McSally, a former military pilot. If Mr. Kelly wins, state election law stipulates a final canvass of the balloting be completed by the end of November, barring legal challenges.

On Friday, Republican and Democratic election attorneys told The Arizona Republic that such a scenario was possible — a possibility embraced on social media by progressives grappling with the dark and unnerving prospect of a high-stakes court fight with an uncertain outcome.

more
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/us/elections/the-winner-of-the-arizona-senate-race-could-be-seated-in-time-for-a-vote-on-a-supreme-court-pick.html

[Fishrrman]

All the more reason for the Republicans to "push this one through" with all deliberate speed.
Get the new Justice seated by November 28th...!

[libertybele]

All the more reason for the Republicans to "push this one through" with all deliberate speed.
Get the new Justice seated by November 28th...!

The vote is already narrowed because of Murkowski, Collins and Mittens.  I'm not seeing how they are going to be able to seat a new justice without those votes.

Anyone??

[catfish1957]

The vote is already narrowed because of Murkowski, Collins and Mittens.  I'm not seeing how they are going to be able to seat a new justice without those votes.

Anyone??

I'm hedging there are a few dims who might want to avoid the backlash of voting down a minority female.  Plus Jones from Alabama, might not want to hurt his chances, by voting down a qualified candidate based on politics alone.

[Fishrrman]

bele wrote:
"The vote is already narrowed because of Murkowski, Collins and Mittens.  I'm not seeing how they are going to be able to seat a new justice without those votes."

Stop being a hand-wringer.
I answered the same issue you posed above in another reply:
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php?topic=414851.msg2288741#msg2288741

[RedHead]

The vote is already narrowed because of Murkowski, Collins and Mittens.  I'm not seeing how they are going to be able to seat a new justice without those votes.

Anyone??

No, because I don't think they'll be the only three.  Lamar Alexander is retiring; he may decide not to vote for the nominee to spite Trump.  Gardner is trailing.  If he thinks he might have a chance then he won't vote to confirm before the election.  Grassley has said in the past under hypothetical situation that there shouldn't be a vote.  There may well be others.

[libertybele]

bele wrote:
"The vote is already narrowed because of Murkowski, Collins and Mittens.  I'm not seeing how they are going to be able to seat a new justice without those votes."

Stop being a hand-wringer.
I answered the same issue you posed above in another reply:
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php?topic=414851.msg2288741#msg2288741

Yes you explained and I acknowledged.

[sneakypete]

I'm hedging there are a few dims who might want to avoid the backlash of voting down a minority female.  Plus Jones from Alabama, might not want to hurt his chances, by voting down a qualified candidate based on politics alone.

@catfish1957

Bingo!

When it comes to which is more important,party loyalty or being re-elected,selfish self-interest wins every time.

There has to be a few Dims who even the DNC KNOWS are going to vote Trumps nominee up in order to stay in office,but can't trash them because they need to get them re-elected so they can count on their votes on other bills.