Senate kicks off fight over Trump's Supreme Court pick

The Senate is teeing off an explosive fight over the future of the Supreme Court just three weeks before Election Day.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett will step into the national spotlight Monday morning when the Senate Judiciary Committee begins a four-day hearing for her nomination to fill the seat left vacant by the death of Justice Ruth Bader GinsburgRuth Bader GinsburgDefusing the judicial confirmation process Conservative justices help save ObamaCare — for now Biden set to roll back Trump rules on abortion MORE.

The battle is the latest twist in an already chaotic election year that has seen an impeachment trial, a global health pandemic, a subsequent recession and, more recently, President TrumpDonald John TrumpManufacturers association calls on GSA to begin transition process Biden vote tally getting close to 80 million Brent Budowsky wins The Hill's 2020 election prediction contest MORE and dozens in his orbit becoming infected with the coronavirus.

“We’re in an utterly different context. ... We’re in the middle of a pandemic and a public health crisis and a presidential election that has already started,” said Sen. Christopher CoonsChris Andrew CoonsEthics experts ask Senate to investigate Graham's probe of mail-in voting Hillicon Valley: Trump national security advisor says Huawei threat 'No. 1 concern' moving forward | Silicon Valley eager for Biden to reverse Trump visa rules | Democratic senators urge Facebook to take action against anti-Muslim bigotry Democratic senators urge Facebook to take action on anti-Muslim bigotry MORE (D-Del.), about the confirmation hearing. “There is no precedent.”

Tensions are already running high among senators, and in the country, just 22 days before the Nov. 3 elections, setting a volatile backdrop for a hearing that is expected to touch on hot-button issues like abortion and health care with a nominee who could shape the future of the court for decades.

Sen. John CornynJohn CornynHillicon Valley: Trump fires top federal cybersecurity official, GOP senators push back | Apple to pay 3 million to resolve fight over batteries | Los Angeles Police ban use of third-party facial recognition software Trump's cyber firing stirs outrage Meadows meets with Senate GOP to discuss end-of-year priorities MORE (R-Texas), a member of the Judiciary Committee and adviser to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellOn The Money: 12 million to lose federal unemployment benefits after Christmas | Warren urges Biden to cancel student debt | Stocks close with losses as states, cities reimpose COVID-19 restrictions Hillicon Valley: Trump fires top federal cybersecurity official, GOP senators push back | Apple to pay 3 million to resolve fight over batteries | Los Angeles Police ban use of third-party facial recognition software Overnight Health Care: US passes 250K COVID deaths | Pfizer says vaccine shows 95-percent efficacy | Coronavirus relief at a standstill MORE (R-Ky.), said the fight would be like the political bloodbath that was the 2018 confirmation battle over Justice Brett KavanaughBrett Michael KavanaughDefusing the judicial confirmation process The magnificent moderation of Susan Collins Lou Dobbs demands GOP help Trump fight for 'what is rightfully his' MORE but "on steroids."

Sen. Ted CruzRafael (Ted) Edward CruzMcSally, staff asked to break up maskless photo op inside Capitol Capitol's COVID-19 spike could be bad Thanksgiving preview Republican senators urge Trump to label West Bank goods as 'Made in Israel' MORE (R-Texas), another member of the committee, predicted that the hearing would be a “circus.”

With the election looming, Republicans hope the next four days will provide a megaphone to shore up support for GOP Sens. Joni ErnstJoni Kay ErnstBrent Budowsky wins The Hill's 2020 election prediction contest Incoming Iowa GOP lawmaker tests positive for coronavirus Sullivan wins reelection in Alaska, giving Republicans 50 seats in Senate MORE (Iowa), Thom TillisThomas (Thom) Roland TillisGOP Rep. Dan Newhouse tests positive for COVID-19 Colorado Democrat Ed Perlmutter tests positive for coronavirus Lawmakers question tech CEOs about content moderation in first post-election hearing MORE (N.C.) and Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamThe Hill's Campaign Report: Trump campaign files for Wis. recount l Secretaries of state fume at Trump allegations l Biden angered over transition delay Georgia elections chief: 'Emotional abuse' to mislead voters about fraud GOP breaks with Trump firing of cyber chief: Adds to 'confusion and chaos' MORE (S.C.), the Judiciary Committee chairman, in their tough reelection bids.

Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala HarrisOn The Money: 12 million to lose federal unemployment benefits after Christmas | Warren urges Biden to cancel student debt | Stocks close with losses as states, cities reimpose COVID-19 restrictions OVERNIGHT ENERGY: Barrasso to seek top spot on Energy and Natural Resources Committee | Forest Service finalizes rule weakening environmental review of its projects | Biden to enlist Agriculture, Transportation agencies in climate fight US is far from gender balance in politics despite record year for women candidates MORE (D-Calif.) — the Democratic vice presidential nominee known in the Senate for her prosecutorial questioning style — will be under close scrutiny as Republicans hope for any missteps that could be used against Democratic presidential nominee Joe BidenJoe BidenManufacturers association calls on GSA to begin transition process Biden vote tally getting close to 80 million AOC, progressive Dems attack corporate greed during health care discussion MORE.

Democrats, meanwhile, are preparing to use the national stage to grill Barrett on her positions on issues such as health care, abortion rights and whether she would recuse herself from election-related cases, something she has so far refused to commit to.

Democrats view health care as a favorable issue that allows them to both dig into Barrett’s background and try to go on the attack against Republicans. The Supreme Court is set to hear a case that could determine the fate of the Affordable Care Act a week after the election, providing Democrats with an opening to put it front and center in both their battles for the Senate majority and the White House.

“They are determined to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat with a conservative justice as quickly as possible because of the oral arguments on Nov. 10,” Sen. Dick DurbinDick DurbinBiden picks Obama communications director to lead confirmation team: report Democrats vent to Schumer over Senate majority failure Trump's controversial Fed nominee stalled after Senate setback MORE (D-Ill.) told reporters on a press call. “If they succeed, 20 million Americans would lose their health care.”

Barrett’s views on Roe v. Wade are also getting fresh scrutiny after a 2006 anti-abortion ad signed by Barrett, who was then a professor, was omitted from records provided to the Judiciary Committee.

But Democrats are also eager to avoid giving Republicans any fodder in the final stretch before Election Day. For that reason, they are expected to avoid raising Barrett’s religion.

“I don’t intend to question her about her personal views, her private religious faith or views. I don’t expect my colleagues will either,” Coons said.

Democrats warn that stumbling onto that political landmine would only feed GOP talking points. Republicans have been eager to point in recent days to an exchange from Barrett’s 2017 circuit court confirmation hearing about her Catholic faith. Sen. Dianne FeinsteinDianne Emiel FeinsteinVoting machine company denies Trump claims about software issues Top Latino group calls for Padilla as Harris's Senate replacement Pressure grows on California governor to name Harris replacement MORE (D-Calif.), the ranking member on the committee, told Barrett at the time that “the conclusion one draws is the dogma lives loudly within you” as she questioned if Barrett would be able to separate her religious views from her job as a judge.

In many ways, the hearing will be unlike any other in modern history. The Capitol has been closed to the public since March, meaning members of the public will not be allowed in the room. That means protesters who lined the hallways and disrupted hearings during the contentious fights over Kavanaugh and Justice Neil GorsuchNeil GorsuchDefusing the judicial confirmation process Reinvesting in American leadership Supreme Court orders separate count of late-arriving Pa. ballots MORE will be limited to gathering outside.

Some senators on the committee, including those who recently tested positive for COVID-19, are expected to appear remotely — a first for a Supreme Court hearing.

Democrats have used a recent coronavirus outbreak in Washington to try to build public pressure on Republicans to either delay the hearings or require testing for those in the room after three GOP senators, including two members of the committee, tested positive for the coronavirus. An additional two members, Cruz and Sen. Ben SasseBen SasseHillicon Valley: Trump fires top federal cybersecurity official, GOP senators push back | Apple to pay 3 million to resolve fight over batteries | Los Angeles Police ban use of third-party facial recognition software Cyber agency urges employees not to lose focus in wake of director's firing GOP breaks with Trump firing of cyber chief: Adds to 'confusion and chaos' MORE (R-Neb.), are self-isolating but have tested negative and are expected to return in person for part or all of the hearings this week.

“We urge you against unsafely moving forward with these hearings while no clear testing regime is in place to ensure that they do not become another super-spreader of this deadly virus,” Democratic Sens. Patrick LeahyPatrick Joseph LeahyMcConnell wants deal this week on fiscal 2021 spending figures Democratic senators urge Facebook to take action on anti-Muslim bigotry Senate releases spending bills, setting up negotiations for December deal MORE (Vt.), Cory BookerCory BookerSenate Democrats reelect Schumer as leader by acclamation  Hill associations push for more diversity in lawmakers' staffs Sanders celebrates Biden-Harris victory: 'Thank God democracy won out' MORE (N.J.) and Harris wrote in a letter to Graham on Friday.

Republicans have rejected those requests, arguing they are nothing but a stall tactic and that any senator who wants to participate remotely in the hearings will be able to do so.

"The first item of priority in the Senate is the Supreme Court. We have a stunningly outstanding nominee. We have a process to get through that nomination and we intend to put her on the Supreme Court in the next few weeks,” McConnell told reporters in Kentucky on Friday.

Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court would help reshape the country’s judiciary, locking in a 6-3 conservative court. A Washington Post analysis found that if Trump was able to put a third justice on the bench, it would pave the way for the most conservative court since 1950. Another analysis found that Barrett, if confirmed, would be the third most conservative justice behind Clarence ThomasClarence ThomasDefusing the judicial confirmation process Will the Supreme Court take ObamaCare off life-support? The overlooked significance Kamala Harris brought to the Biden-Harris ticket MORE and Samuel AlitoSamuel AlitoDefusing the judicial confirmation process The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by the UAE Embassy in Washington, DC - Dems push McConnell on COVID-19 relief; Grassley contracts COVID-19 Elizabeth Warren slams Justice Alito over 'nakedly partisan' speech MORE.

But despite the historic nature of the Supreme Court fight, which would set a new record for the closest to a presidential election a justice has been confirmed, the outcome, absent an eleventh-hour surprise, appears prebaked.

Republicans nixed the 60-vote procedural hurdle for Supreme Court nominees in 2017, meaning Barrett only needs 50 yes votes, plus Vice President Pence to break a tie, if all senators are voting.

Republicans hold 53 seats, meaning McConnell can lose three GOP senators. Only two — Susan CollinsSusan Margaret CollinsHillicon Valley: Trump fires top federal cybersecurity official, GOP senators push back | Apple to pay 3 million to resolve fight over batteries | Los Angeles Police ban use of third-party facial recognition software GOP breaks with Trump firing of cyber chief: Adds to 'confusion and chaos' The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by the UAE Embassy in Washington, DC - Dems push McConnell on COVID-19 relief; Grassley contracts COVID-19 MORE (Maine) and Lisa MurkowskiLisa Ann MurkowskiOVERNIGHT ENERGY: Barrasso to seek top spot on Energy and Natural Resources Committee | Forest Service finalizes rule weakening environmental review of its projects | Biden to enlist Agriculture, Transportation agencies in climate fight Senate advances energy regulator nominees despite uncertainty of floor vote Barrasso to seek top spot on Energy and Natural Resources Committee MORE (Alaska) — have said they do not believe a nominee should get a vote before the elections, and only Collins has specifically pledged that she would vote "no" if it is brought up before Nov. 3.

Democrats acknowledge that their leverage is limited and that without the support of four GOP senators they can’t block Barrett from being confirmed. Democrats are planning to boycott the committee votes if GOP senators are absent in order to deny Republicans the quorum they need to move forward under the rules. Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) has also hinted they also have procedural levers they could pull to stall the process once Barrett’s nomination hits the floor.

"We will have many more procedural options when it comes to a vote in the Senate committee and a vote on the floor and we will use every tool in the toolbox,” Schumer said during a recent press conference in New York.

But Republicans have set an aggressive timeline to place Barrett on the bench before Nov. 3. Graham is expected to tee up a committee vote for Oct. 22. That would pave a way for a final confirmation vote by Oct. 29, five days before the elections.

“I support doing whatever is necessary to complete the task before us and confirm Judge Barrett and believe we will do so,” Cruz said. “If the Democrats engage in procedural shenanigans, which I think is quite likely, I believe the majority will do whatever is necessary to overcome those delay tactics and to complete the confirmation.”

Alexander Bolton contributed