Each new Congress sets its own rules. Using Harry Reid’s precedent, the new Senate will not accept a filibuster of a conservative replacement for Scalia. But, if the Democrats don’t force a confrontation on the Scalia seat, they might be given a more respectful hearing on the replacement of liberal justices. Maybe Judge Garland might get a second run.

On the other hand, the anti-abortion people will need one more vote beyond Scalia’s if they want to overturn Roe v Wade.

“If there was an ideological standoff between President and Senate, would it be legal to confirm two nominees in a package, one liberal and one conservative, to replace one liberal and one conservative USSC judges?”

Yes, but the President would have to nominate one liberal on one conservative first. The Senate can not confirm someone the President hasn’t nominated.

Such a deal was struck under GW Bush for Circuit court judges. Bush re-appointed a Clinton Nominee.

Except that there is nothing to stop the Republican majority in the Senate from putting an end to filibusters for Supreme Court nominees.

If the Democrats threaten to filibuster every Trump SCOTUS nominee, there isn’t much political downside for the Republicans to pull the trigger on the “nuclear option”.

“They apparently forgot that Harry Reid put the filibuster in a deep coma seven years ago.”

EXCEPT for Supreme Court nominees. Their confirmation is still subject to Senate filibuster.

The NYT is asking Senate Democrats to filibuster conservative court nominees. They apparently forgot that Harry Reid put the filibuster in a deep coma seven years ago.

Democrats allowed Dubya Bush to replace two USSC conservatives with conservatives, and Republicans allowed Obama to replace two liberals with liberals. (Sandra Day O’Connor also had some libertarian and federalist leanings which, unfortunately, did not continue in her conservative successors.)

This year, Republicans balked when Obama tried to replace a conservative with a liberal, shifting control of the USSC. The NYT wish they could go back in a time machine and warn Senate Democrats to block Nixon and Reagan from shifting the USSC rightward.

Question:
If there was an ideological standoff between President and Senate, would it be legal to confirm two nominees in a package, one liberal and one conservative, to replace one liberal and one conservative USSC judges?