Debate recap: Clinton describes future SCOTUS picks; Trump vows to reopen email probe
Supreme Court nominations and special prosecutors were among the topics discussed in the debate on Sunday between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
Asked about their potential Supreme Court nominees, Trump pointed to his released lists of potential nominees and said they had been “very beautifully reviewed by just about everybody,” report the Huffington Post and Law.com. He also said he would pick someone in the mold of Justice Antonin Scalia.
Law.com points out that one person on Trump’s lists, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, urged Trump to drop out of the race on Saturday.
Clinton, on the other hand, gave a description that hinted her Supreme Court picks could resemble Justice Sonia Sotomayor, according to the Huffington Post story.
“I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works, who have real-life experience, who have not just been in a big law firm and maybe clerked for a judge and then gotten on the bench, but maybe they tried more cases,” Clinton said.
Clinton did not mention pending Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland by name, and did not commit to renominating him if the Senate failed to confirm his nomination before she took office, according to the stories and Above the Law. Clinton said she regretted that the Senate “has not done its job and they have not permitted a vote on the person that President Obama—a highly qualified person—they’ve not given him a vote.”
The prosecution issue surfaced as Donald Trump criticized Hillary Clinton for using a private email server while secretary of state, report the Washington Post, Law.com and NPR.
“If I win,” Trump said, addressing Clinton, “I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation.”
NPR spoke with former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who served under President George W. Bush, about Trump’s pledge. Here is part of Mukasey’s answer:
“I don’t see it happening even if he’s elected, which is to say the decision has to be made initially by the attorney general as to whether the case warrants reopening at all. There may be reasons to look into it again, including matters not considered, including matters considered but where erroneous conclusions were arrived at.
“Then the question is whether you appoint a special counsel. In this case perhaps you do because the matter was looked at by the Justice Department, and it’s—hardly makes sense for the Justice Department then to redo its own investigation.
“But then you have to determine whether the bringing of charges is proper. And then you start to get into questions of policy and whether doing that would make us look like a banana republic, which I think it would.”
