Democratic challenger Mark Kelly, left, and Republican U.S. Sen. Martha McSally.

 File photos

A mounting fight over the makeup of the Supreme Court is drawing extra attention to Arizona’s already high-profile Senate race.

But political analysts question how much of an impact the high-court drama will have on the contest, even if Democratic challenger Mark Kelly defeats Republican Sen. Martha McSally and gets sworn into office by the end of November.

The two candidates have already staked out opposing positions on how to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s vacant seat.

McSally tweeted out her intentions Friday evening, within two hours of the first news reports of Ginsburg’s death.

Fifteen minutes after a post praising Ginsburg and offering prayers for the justice’s family, McSally wrote on Twitter, “This U.S. Senate should vote on President Trump’s next nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Kelly issued a statement of his own on Twitter and his campaign website Sunday evening.

“Arizonans will begin casting their ballots in a few weeks, and I believe the people elected to the presidency and Senate in November should fill this Supreme Court vacancy,” Kelly wrote. “When it comes to making a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, Washington shouldn’t rush that process for political purposes. This is a decision that will impact Arizonans, especially with an upcoming case about health care and protections for preexisting conditions.”

A brief guide to state absentee voting rules and resources for requesting mail-in ballots for the upcoming election.
Winner could be sworn in this year

If Kelly defeats McSally, he could be seated in the Senate as soon as the election results are certified, according to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office.

State law does not specify when the winner of a special election should take over for someone appointed to Congress by the governor, said Sophia Solis, spokeswoman for the office.

Federal law and Senate practices dictate that the senator-elect would be seated as soon as the general election is certified and he or she takes the oath of office.

The Secretary of State’s Office is slated to canvass election results on Nov. 30, Solis said.

But even if Kelly were to be seated immediately after that, there’s no guarantee he will ever get the chance to vote on President Trump’s third Supreme Court nominee, let alone change the outcome of what is certain to be one of the most contentious confirmation processes in recent history.

Chad Westerland is an associate professor of political science in the University of Arizona’s School of Government and Public Policy, where he studies judicial politics.

About the only thing a Kelly win might change is the schedule for confirmation, Westerland said. “The strategy of the Republicans would be to rush the vote,” he said.

Westerland has little doubt about how this process will go: The Republicans will seek to ram Trump’s nominee through, and the Democrats will try to stop them, though he said there isn’t a lot they can do beyond “mostly rhetorical” gestures.

“I would be absolutely shocked if it didn’t go this way. I’d have to rethink everything I thought we knew.”

Handicapper doesn’t expect race to change

Kelly and McSally are vying for the right to finish out the unexpired term of the late Sen. John McCain, which runs through January 2023. Gov. Doug Ducey appointed McSally to the seat after McCain’s death in 2018.

Kelly holds a sizable fundraising advantage, and polls consistently show him in the lead.

“We’ve had that race ‘leans Democrat’ since March. I don’t see the court vacancy changing this race a whole bunch,” said J. Miles Coleman, associate editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball, an election forecasting publication from political analyst Larry Sabato and the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics. “If the Democrats are going to have a realistic chance of flipping the Senate, Arizona is basically a must-win.”

Coleman said McSally had a choice in the Supreme Court fight to either stand with her fellow Republicans or come out against filling the vacancy right away in an effort to woo independent voters.

“If I were her, I’d be trying to create some space between (me) and Trump. It looks like she’s going the other way,” Coleman said. “I feel like she’s maybe trying to hug Trump too close. How much more of that base can she really consolidate now?”

Any fallout might be worth the prize

Westerland disagrees. He said even if McSally wanted to wait to fill Ginsburg’s seat until after inauguration next year — and there is no evidence to suggest that she does — she can’t risk losing her core support among GOP voters.

Derailing an opportunity for your party to fill a seat on the Supreme Court is a guaranteed way to alienate your base, Westerland said. To do so in hopes of winning over an unknown number of independent voters is simply far too much of a risk for an uncertain reward, he said.

As for any potential political fallout from rushing the confirmation process now after what Republicans did in 2016 to stop President Obama’s last high court nominee, Westerland said the prize is worth the price.

“You take these hits, and you put someone on the Supreme Court,” he said.

Ultimately, Westerland and others said, how Ginsburg’s seat gets filled probably won’t change the way anyone was already planning to vote in the Arizona Senate race, though it could energize both campaigns and bring in some additional cash.

UA political communication professor Kate Kenski said Kelly and McSally could see a boost in contributions from supporters who are stirred up by the Supreme Court fight, though she doesn’t expect to see a massive shift in public opinion, other than to possibly drive an already polarized electorate deeper into their corners.

“Depending on how the next couple weeks unfold with a possible confirmation hearing for a new Supreme Court justice, the issue may further amplify the public’s concerns on both sides of the political spectrum,” Kenski said in an email.

A national Gallup poll from before Ginsburg’s death showed that just 3% of voters saw the makeup of the courts as the most important issue facing the country. Kenski said that number will probably climb somewhat in future polls, but it won’t surpass much deeper concerns over the pandemic, the state of the economy and race relations in America, she said.

Using court issue to “mobilize, not convert”

Neither campaign is short on cash. Both Kelly and McSally have consistently ranked among the top fundraisers in the country for months now, and outside groups are pouring millions of dollars more into the race on both sides.

Eventually, there is simply no more ad time left to buy, and additional money “is not going to move the needle that much,” Coleman said. “At some point you get sort of an oversaturation.”

Westerland expects the two camps to mostly use the Supreme Court issue to “mobilize, not convert” voters. Getting the right people to the polls could decide who wins on Nov. 3 and who will be holding all the cards the next time there is a vacancy on the high court.

Or maybe the experts are wrong. Maybe none of this will go the way they think it will. In the age of Trump, Westerland certainly acknowledges the possibility of a surprise.

“That’s something we’ve all struggled with over the past four or five years as political scientists,” he said. “It’s hard to know what matters.”

Become a #ThisIsTucson member! Your contribution helps our team bring you stories that keep you connected to the community. Become a member today.

Contact reporter Henry Brean at hbrean@tucson.com or 520-573 4283. On Twitter: @RefriedBrean.