Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

What’s next for Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination

A vote in the Senate is expected the week of October 26.

Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the third day of her Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on October 14.
Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the third day of her Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on October 14.
Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the third day of her Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill on October 14.
Hilary Swift/Getty Images
Li Zhou
Li Zhou is a former politics reporter at Vox, where she covers Congress and elections. Previously, she was a tech policy reporter at Politico and an editorial fellow at the Atlantic.

Step one on the all-but-certain path to Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the US Supreme Court — a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee — is officially complete.

Her nomination to fill the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat now heads to a committee vote next Thursday, and a full Senate vote shortly after that. Barring any significant changes in the interim, she’s widely expected to get confirmed, though Democrats are weighing some procedural maneuvers to express their opposition.

Barrett’s testimony this week highlighted her past critiques of decisions holding up the Affordable Care Act and her reluctance to classify Roe as a super-precedent. But this isn’t expected to change many votes, if any. “This is probably not about persuading each other unless something dramatic happens,” Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said at the start of the hearing. “All Republicans will vote yes and all the Democrats will vote no.”

Graham’s prediction, it seems, is likely to play out in the coming weeks.

Because of Republicans’ 53-47 Senate majority, Barrett’s nomination is poised to go through with little fanfare. Unless four Senate Republicans break with their party — since Vice President Mike Pence can be the deciding vote in the case of a 50-50 tie — the GOP has the votes it needs to keep on rushing through her confirmation.

What comes next

The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Barrett’s nomination on October 22, and the full Senate is expected to do so the week of October 26. Despite ongoing concerns about coronavirus exposure in the Capitol, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he plans to move “full steam ahead” on the confirmation process.

Thus far, no Republicans have signaled that they will vote against Barrett’s nomination, and GOP lawmakers who have recently contracted coronavirus have indicated that they will likely be able to vote.

Previously, there were questions about whether Republicans would have the numbers they needed to proceed if members with coronavirus were still quarantined when the floor vote was scheduled to take place. Given their presence at the hearing this week, Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) seem like they’ll be able to make it to a vote despite positive tests. And Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), who also tested positive, is vowing to cast his vote as well.

Barrett’s vote could ultimately wind up breaking roughly along party lines. In the days after Ginsburg’s death, Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) said that they opposed holding a vote before the election, and Collins has said she will vote against the nominee because of the timing. No other Republican senators have said that they would oppose the timing of the vote or the nomination itself, suggesting that even if the two of them defect from the conference, the GOP will still have a 51-person majority to confirm Barrett.

Democrats, meanwhile, have a limited set of procedural tools available to complicate the process.

Democrats have threatened to withhold a quorum on the committee vote and the floor vote

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has said that Democrats will try to use their limited options to oppose the next steps in Barrett’s confirmation. In both the upcoming committee vote and the floor vote, Democrats are able to withhold a “quorum,” or the required number of members needed for business to proceed, though they won’t be able to halt the nomination altogether.

“We will talk about when the actual vote occurs in committee and on the floor. Democrats will not supply the quorum. Period,” Schumer said last Sunday.

In the Judiciary Committee, for example, at least two members of the minority party must be present, along with the majority of the 22-person panel, for votes on nominees to take place. It’s possible that Democrats just won’t attend next Thursday’s vote and provide the two members needed for committee business. If Democrats don’t show up, however, Republicans could also disregard these rules and move ahead anyway. (Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has effectively done this in the past in trying to advance immigration legislation.)

Similarly, for a floor vote, at least 51 members of the Senate need to be there for a nomination to be considered, so a Democratic boycott would force Republicans to ensure that nearly all their members are present. While this could be inconvenient for some of the battleground senators who are out campaigning, the GOP’s 53-member majority means they won’t need Democrats to make the quorum and carry on with the vote.

There aren’t a ton of procedural options Democrats can use to block Barrett’s nomination because the vote threshold for Supreme Court nominees was reduced to a simple majority by Senate Republicans in 2017 — after Democrats did the same for lower court nominees in 2013.

To get the process rolling on a vote, McConnell needs to close debate on the nomination, a step known as invoking cloture. To do that, he’ll have to bring the Senate into an executive session, a move that requires a simple majority of votes — which Republicans are expected to have. At that point, he won’t need unanimous consent to move forward with a cloture vote or a confirmation vote, according to George Washington University political science professor Sarah Binder.

Democrats could object to unanimous consent requests here and there, but ultimately McConnell and the GOP will get to the motion to get to executive session and the nomination,” Binder tells Vox. “I can’t see Democratic tactics successfully delaying a vote until after the elections.”

As such, Barrett is poised to be the next justice on the Supreme Court, and solidify a 6-3 conservative majority in the process. “We don’t have some special procedural way to stop this sham,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) has said.

Clarification: This article has been updated to reflect Sen. Susan Collins’s position on a vote on Barrett’s nomination.

More in Politics

The Logoff
Trump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictionsTrump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictions
The Logoff

How the Trump administration is still trying to rewrite January 6 history.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Donald Trump messed with the wrong popeDonald Trump messed with the wrong pope
Politics

Trump fought with Pope Francis before. He’s finding Pope Leo XIV to be a tougher foil.

By Christian Paz
Podcasts
A cautionary tale about tax cutsA cautionary tale about tax cuts
Podcast
Podcasts

California cut property taxes in the 1970s. It didn’t go so well.

By Miles Bryan and Noel King
Podcasts
Obama’s top Iran negotiator on Trump’s screwupsObama’s top Iran negotiator on Trump’s screwups
Podcast
Podcasts

Wendy Sherman helped Obama reach a deal with Iran. Here’s what she thinks Trump is doing wrong.

By Kelli Wessinger and Noel King
Politics
The Supreme Court could legalize moonshine, and ruin everything elseThe Supreme Court could legalize moonshine, and ruin everything else
Politics

McNutt v. DOJ could allow the justices to seize tremendous power over the US economy.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
The new Hormuz blockade, briefly explainedThe new Hormuz blockade, briefly explained
The Logoff

Trump tries Iran’s playbook.

By Cameron Peters