Experts Available: The Supreme Court and Confirmation Battle

The fight over the Supreme Court seat formerly occupied by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is just getting started. For journalists covering the looming confirmation battle and its implications for the 2020 election, the experts below are available for comments and analysis. 

Boston University

Expert on the cross-section of health law and constitutional law with emphasis health care reform, the role of federalism in health care, and Medicaid.


"Supreme Court appointees can shape the national landscape for decades, yet Justice Ginsburg’s lifelong project to achieve true equality -- not only for women but for all people -- is in jeopardy. The major issues of today, including the stability of universal access to health care under the ACA, voting rights, and legal protections for vulnerable populations, are in play not only as the next justice is appointed but also in the upcoming election."

Cleveland State University

Expert on federal courts, the Supreme Court, separation-of-powers, and the intersection between religious freedoms and LGBTQ rights.


"The passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg left a huge void -- on the Court and beyond. Our current political climate, however, abhors vacuum. What are the legal, social, and political implications of having an open seat on the Supreme Court less than 45 days before the Presidential Election?"

City University of New York

Expert on U.S. immigration and constitutional law, policy, and history, as well as the history of the Supreme Court in relation to the U.S. Courts of Appeals.


"Unable to win elections and positions of power through democratic means alone, the GOP continues to lean on un-democratic institutions like the Electoral College, US Senate, and federal courts to ram through their unpopular policy proposals such as in immigration and healthcare."

Fairleigh Dickinson University

Expert on judicial independence, the separation of powers, constitutional reform, and law and politics.


"The upcoming confirmation battle is a pivot point for the Court in the age of hyperpartisanship. The parties can either hammer out a compromise that will disappoint their base but keep up at least the appearance of an independent and apolitical court or enter a new age of constitutional hardball."

University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law

Expert on constitutional law and inequality, rooted in Critical Race Theory.


"This is not simply a judicial confirmation battle in an election year, but an existential struggle for the fundamental rights that Justice Ginsburg fought for during her career as a legal scholar, pathbreaking and preeminent civil rights litigator, and esteemed justice. The legitimacy of the High Court is diminished by the rank partisanship of the judicial nomination process."

The Ohio State University

Expert on the American judiciary with a specific interest in federal judicial selection processes and politics and media coverage of the Supreme Court.


"The judicial selection wars of the past decade over both lower court and Supreme Court nominations threaten to reach a new tit for tat crescendo in light of the Ginsburg vacancy and coming Presidential and Senate elections."

Stetson University College of Law

Expert on constitutional law and election law with a focus on money in politics. Torres-Spelliscy is the head of research for the Corporate Reform Coalition, which works on revising corporate and securities laws post-Citizens United v. FEC. She has helped to draft several Supreme Court amicus briefs and provides testimony for law makers who are crafting new laws and new rules.