With an eye on November ...

The U.S. Supreme Court convenes on its traditional first Monday in October with one big question mark: Can the eight justices produce a ruling on anything controversial in light of the vacancy created by the February death of conservative stalwart Antonin Scalia?

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell signaled on the day of Scalia’s death that Republicans would not allow a confirmation vote on anyone selected by President Obama in his final year in office. “The American people should have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court justice,” McConnell said. The Senate GOP leadership has held fast to that stance, even after Obama nominated Merrick Garland, a federal appeals court judge generally regarded as the most centrist on the White House short list.

So the court is going into the new term with a 4-4 left-right split, although Republican appointee Anthony Kennedy has been known to cross over on occasion, such as his siding with the Democratic appointees last term in two consequential Texas cases. One ruling upheld affirmative action in college admissions; the other struck down the state’s restrictive abortion law.

For now, a deadlock generally gives the court’s liberals an advantage. Under the high court rules, a 4-4 tie allows a lower-court ruling to stand without a written opinion — although it is not considered a precedent, and the issue could eventually return. Scalia was not only a reliable conservative vote, he was a domineering presence who wrote piercing opinions.

The court had four such ties after Scalia’s death.

The high court will be hearing appeals this fall on the death penalty, criminal law and racial discrimination in North Carolina’s voting districts. The stonewalling Senate Republicans have done the court and the nation a disservice by forcing the vacancy to persist. Garland’s nomination already has surpassed the record of 125 days between the appointment and confirmation of Louis Brandeis in 1916.

The Senate Republicans’ rationale — that the direction of the court should be decided by American voters — is not quite playing out as advertised. So far, the Supreme Court has not been a driving issue in the presidential election, though Republican Donald Trump has offered a list of 21 conservatives he would consider for appointment. He has reminded his supporters that the next president could make “three, four, five appointments.”

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, appointed by President Bill Clinton, is the oldest justice at 83; she is followed by Anthony Kennedy (80, Reagan appointee) and Stephen Breyer (78, Clinton appointee). The replacement of either Ginsburg or Breyer with a Trump appointee — he has suggested gun rights and opposition to abortion would be among his litmus tests — would solidify a conservative majority. A more extensive turnover would be neither surprising nor unprecedented. Presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan each had the chance to fill four vacancies.

The Supreme Court may be in a holding pattern at the moment, but the outcome on Nov. 8 could determine its direction for a generation or more.