Debating the hypothetical, Grassley sticks with the rule the Dems at the time insisted was grossly un-American BS.

What to do if RBG dies in 2020, or a seat otherwise opens up.

With all this talk of dates it helps to recall that while the president holds office until January 20 the congress is done January 3.

The lame duck session begins after the November 3 election and extends to January 3, though the congress would usually go home for the holidays.

Joni Ernst: If Trump has a Supreme Court nominee, Senate should hold hearings

U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst said Friday that the Senate should hold hearings on any Supreme Court nomination President Donald Trump might make this year, even if he loses November's election. 

"(If) it is a lame-duck session, I would support going ahead with any hearings that we might have," Ernst, a Republican, said during a taping of the Iowa Press show on Iowa PBS. 

"And if it comes to an appointment prior to the end of the year, I would be supportive of that."

. . . .

U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican, drew Democrats' condemnation in 2016 when, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he blocked confirmation hearings for President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland.

That seat became vacant when Justice Antonin Scalia died unexpectedly in February 2016. Obama made his appointment shortly after, but Grassley led the effort to block Garland's confirmation. 

At the time, Grassley cited "the Biden Rule" — a guideline stemming from a speech given by then-Senator Joe Biden in 1992 — in holding up the process. 

Grassley said the decision to fill the vacancy should be made by whomever was elected president in November 2016 — nine months after the seat became vacant.

Biden's claim of 1992 was completely ignored by everyone until Grassley decided it was a "rule" absolutely binding on the senate in 2016, just in time to rob Obama and the Democrats of the seat.

Democrats were not amused, Biden likely least of all.

Ernst publicly agreed with Grassley's decision. 

Grassley: Supreme Court seat should be left open until after election if vacant in 2020

U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley said Friday that he would personally oppose Senate consideration of Supreme Court nominees in 2020 despite potential opposition from President Donald Trump and Republican leaders. 

. . . .

Grassley cited the "Biden Rule" — a guideline stemming from a speech given by then-Senator Joe Biden in 1992 — which contends that a vacancy on the Supreme Court in a presidential election year should be left open so the American people can have a say in who makes the decision. 

. . . .

"Well, I don't know what history will do and I don't care what history will do," Grassley said. "I'm just following what was established by the Biden Rule in 1986 and then emphasized by him in 1992.

"They set the pattern. I didn't set the pattern. But it was very legitimate that you can't have one rule for Democratic presidents and another rule for Republican presidents."

. . . .

Henderson also questioned Grassley on his comments that Supreme Court justices planning on retiring should announce it immediately, amid rumors that Justice Anthony Kennedy plans to retire, as reported by USA Today. 

Given a chance, Trump would push court pick before election

President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have tried to make it clear: Given the chance, they would push through a Supreme Court nominee should a vacancy occur before Election Day

. . . .

Trump administration officials have underscored that Trump would not hesitate to fill an opening before voters have their say Nov. 3, less than four months away, on whether to give him a second term.

Four years ago, also in a presidential election year, the GOP-controlled Senate refused to hold a hearing or vote when President Barack Obama, a Democrat, nominated federal judge Merrick Garland to succeed Justice Antonin Scalia after his death in February. 

Nine months before that year's election, McConnell said voters should determine who would nominate the person to fill that seat.

Fast forward to this past week. 

Trump's chief of staff, Mark Meadows, told reporters: “I can’t imagine that if he had a vacancy on the Supreme Court that he would not very quickly make the appointment and look for the Senate to take quick action."

. . . .

Leading Republicans, including the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, now say it’s OK to consider an election-year appointment when the Senate and the White House are held by the same party.

“Merrick Garland was a different situation,” Graham said in May.

“You had the president of one party nominating, and you had the Senate in the hands of the other party. A situation where you’ve got them both would be different.”

McConnell was even more blunt.

“Yeah, we’d fill it,” he said in a February interview.