The party decided that a made-for-TV moment could backfire, and instead opted for a strategy of maximum disruption.
Hours before Brett Kavanaugh arrived for his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday, Chuck Schumer and frustrated fellow Democratic senators debated staging a mass walkout — or not showing up at all.
For weeks, the party grappled with how to force the release of millions of pages of missing Kavanaugh documents after Republicans spurned their previous attempts. The discussions culminated during a Labor Day conference call: Senators weighed the drastic protest measures but opted against them, worried about what would come next and whether the fallout from a made-for-TV moment would undercut their efforts to defeat the nomination, according to multiple Democratic sources.
The strategy session revealed a divide on the Judiciary Committee between its more aggressive, often younger senators and veterans who prefer to adhere to the chamber’s norms. To bridge that gap, Democrats settled on a middle ground: Disruption.
They created a spectacle by hijacking the hearing as soon as it started and calling for the committee to adjourn against a backdrop of liberal activists being arrested in protest. At the same time, opposition lawmakers left themselves room to grill Kavanaugh in the coming days by remaining active participants in the high court hearings.
The compromise still injected a dose of drama to an otherwise rote day of partisan opening statements.
«If I thought that there was a way that we could stop the hearings from proceeding, I would participate in that. But the hearings are going to proceed. And therefore, we are there to do our job,” said Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii).
“We considered a lot of different options yesterday. This was the agreed approach,” said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). “It really singles this hearing out as something unusual.”
The effort dominated Tuesday morning’s news coverage, but it likely won’t win Democrats the votes they need from moderate Republicans and Democrats to stop Kavanaugh. One of those swing votes, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), later dismissed the protest as “a lot of drama.”
But given the brutal odds face in beating a nominee that they can’t stop unilaterally, Democrats went as far as they could go without splintering.
The effort dominated Tuesday morning’s news coverage, but it likely won’t win Democrats the votes they need from moderate Republicans and Democrats to stop Kavanaugh. One of those swing votes, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), later dismissed the protest as “a lot of drama.”
But given the brutal odds they face in beating a nominee that they can’t stop unilaterally, Democrats went as far as they could go without splintering.
Even Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) admitted the display had caught on, remarking that “either you run the committee, or it runs you” and telling Democrats that “you guys have been very successful today in running the committee.”
Democrats have been essentially steamrolled by Grassley and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for two-and-a-half years: They blocked Merrick Garland from even receiving a hearing, changed Senate rules to confirm Neil Gorsuch and now are pressing to confirm Kavanaugh before the midterms.
But now, for the first time in weeks, the party received some plaudits that it is finally putting up a fight and challenging the norms that liberals argue conservatives have already eviscerated.
«This was a big step forward, and Kamala Harris showed real leadership by going first in interrupting the hearing. Now we need other Democrats who aren’t on the committee to speak up and oppose this nominee, too,” said Brian Fallon, director of Demand Justice, a group working to defeat Kavanaugh.
Still, the left of the party is hungry for combat. Kevin de León, who is challenging Senate Judiciary ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) for reelection, criticized Democrats for not joining activists in getting arrested for protesting and said on Twitter that “we have to switch tactics.”
Democratic senators on the Judiciary panel spent more than an hour complaining about the GOP’s “mockery” of pre-confirmation vetting and asking instead for the hearing to adjourn. They interrupted Republicans repeatedly to make their point after more than 42,000 documents were released on the eve of the hearing. Harris interrupted Grassley not 10 seconds after he began speaking, marking the day’s climax even before Kavanaugh had spoken.
Inside the room, Democrats projected unity in their disruption even as Republicans privately predicted the displays would turn off their own vulnerable red-state senators, several of whom are facing intense pressure from GOP reelection challengers to back Kavanaugh. Asked about the strategy employed by his colleagues, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) replied: “Not the way I was raised.”
Several committee Democrats declined to comment on their heated debate over how to handle the critical hearing, given the sensitivity of the issue. But if Democrats sensed any risk in their combativeness, they weren’t showing it for the cameras.
“This is not an attempt to delay,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-N. J.) insisted to Grassley. “This is an attempt to be fully equipped to do our constitutional duty.”
Republicans bristled at the spectacle, even as their chances of confirming Kavanaugh improved when former Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who is aiding Kavanaugh’s confirmation, was appointed to fill the seat of recently deceased John McCain.
Some GOP senators expressed grudging respect for the Democratic tactics.
“I’m glad they didn’t boycott,” said Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.). “They’re certainly under a lot of pressure to do something… I’m just glad we’re moving forward.”
“They’ve got to fight. I get that. I understand base politics,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S. C.). “I’ve been in their shoes… people wanted to impeach Obama every 15 minutes on my side. Generally speaking, I thought they handled it pretty well.”
Democrats haven’t ruled out a boycott or walkout in the future. Late Tuesday, a group of them huddled to hash out strategy in the office of Durbin, a senior member of the Judiciary panel, according to a Democratic aide.
For Democrats, the appointment of Kyl marked the latest affront to the nonpartisan process that once governed the high court.
