WI Clarence Thomas Nomination Failed (2018 edition)

So we did talk about this PoD a few years ago, but I thought in light of recent events we might look into it again. So -- what if three Senate votes that went "yes" for confirming Clarence Thomas OTL, instead voted either "no" or "present", such that his nomination failed?

One obvious place to start might be who President Bush Sr nominates second (Emilo Garza, Edith Jones, etc); from there, we might possibly ask how he or she might rule differently in Supreme Court decisions over the next few years. There's also the question of how this might affect the 1992 Election; whether this sets any larger precedent for Supreme Court nominations in general; and the question of whether having Anita Hill's (and others) testimony successfully sink a Supreme Court nomination (possibly in conjunction with said changes to 1992) has a different impact on how the country deals with sexual harassment. And maybe other issues I'm not thinking of.

Thoughts?
 
It's a bit of a tough spot for the White House. Between their absolute desire to get someone who passes muster with the right, and confirmability, they're being pushed in two directions.

Jones, who was reasonably close to being chosen IOTL and in the previous year, might be a tempting choice given what's just happened with Thomas - as a woman - but she was seen as a loose canon, doctrinaire, and very temperamental, so there's big confirmation hearing worries. (This is only a few years after Bork, remember) People will point to Thomas, but at the time it was believed that the only way someone as right-wing as Thomas could pass was in him being black and inhabiting the tradition of the 'black seat' on the court. And remember, this is after Thomas has been Borked.

Thornburgh and Sununu were very keen on a Hispanic as a way of keeping the minority seat while expanding Conservative options for the White House, and Garza was definitely in the mix. (He had an interview with Bush, so the president would already be familiar with him) I see him as more likely than Jones.

Assuming a Democrat wins in 1992, (It need not be Bubba given the nature of what sunk Thomas - though if it is, try to imagine how even more passionately anti-Clinton the GOP will be in this scenario!) the pressure on them to nominate a black justice to the SCOTUS would be pretty huge. I'd say this scenario is bad news for Stephen Breyer.
 
Last edited:
Assuming a Democrat wins in 1992, (It need not be Bubba given the nature of what sunk Thomas) the pressure on them to nominate a black justice to the SCOTUS would be pretty huge. I'd say this scenario is bad news for Stephen Breyer.
Good point there; looking over Clinton's Supreme Court shortlist, the only judge of color I see is Amalya Kearse (who was also considered as Attorney General, FWIW), although Stephen Carter and Barbara Jordan are also outside possibilities.
 
Good point there; looking over Clinton's Supreme Court shortlist, the only judge of color I see is Amalya Kearse (who was also considered as Attorney General, FWIW), although Stephen Carter and Barbara Jordan are also outside possibilities.

It's not going to be Barbara Jordan, apart from anything else her health was in serious decline - she had MS.

Kearse, like Jose Cabranes, is one of those names which appears on the longlists for both parties in this period, but they were probably too moderate for both. (Kearse was also rumoured to be a Republican)

Drew Days' name was mentioned IOTL but he was never seriously considered - if it is Clinton doing the search, it could be just about literally anyone though - Ginsburg only came into the mix at the very last minute after months of batting all sorts of names around.
 
There's also the question of how this might affect the 1992 Election;

Bush most likely does worse than in OTL. I don't think Clinton would make the Supreme Court a big campaign issue given his own issues with women, but Perot probably would probably bring it up and he might take more votes away from 41.
 
So Emilio Garza instead of Thomas, Stephen Carter instead of Ginsburg and maybe Gilbert Merritt instead of Breyer?
Garza sure, though Breyer is more likely to be replaced, I'd think, than Ginsburg; if Ginsburg is replaced by a male person of color (by Carer or who have you), then Blackmun's seat is probably go to a woman (who may or may not be Ginsburg).
 
I thought that the first Clinton nominee has be black (instead of Ginsburg) but, after an Hispanic and a Black, the second Bill nominee has be a white man and Merrit is a good choice. Michael Sandel could be an other name. If a woman, I think that Patricia Wald could be the main alternative to Ginsburg. Sonia Sotomayor is too young, I guess.
 
Top