Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death on Friday kicked off what is sure to be the most consequential Supreme Court confirmation fight in decades — and puts a spotlight on the handful of senators whose votes will determine the future of the court.

The universe of potential swing votes in the Senate is surprisingly small considering how high the stakes are. The following senators will be under enormous pressure — from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and President Donald Trump — to either fall in line, or break from their party in the most dramatic fashion.

McConnell’s decision to hold a vote on Ginsburg's replacement forces him to balance his long-standing desire to cement a conservative legacy in the federal judiciary, while also retaining his power as majority leader.

That there are so few potentially in play lawmakers reflects the hyperpartisan nature of the political landscape in 2020. With less than 45 days left until the election, both sides have largely retreated to their respective sides.

In the coming days, these senators will be forced to answer several important questions. Would you vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee before the election? If a confirmation vote is held in the lame-duck period, would your decision hinge on whether the presidency and the Senate flip?

With 53 Republicans in the Senate, McConnell can afford to lose only three votes. Vice President Mike Pence could break a 50-50 tie if needed. Here’s who to watch:

The true swing votes

During Trump’s impeachment trial, these GOP senators — Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mitt Romney of Utah — were among those deciding whether the trial would feature testimony from witnesses, as Democrats had been pushing.

This time around, the “Three Amigos” are equally as important, and they each find themselves with a slew of factors to consider.

In a statement on Saturday, Collins said the winner of the Nov. 3 presidential election should choose Ginsburg’s replacement, adding that she “would have no objection” to the Senate Judiciary Committee beginning to review the credentials of Trump’s eventual nominee.

“Given the proximity of the presidential election, however, I do not believe that the Senate should vote on the nominee prior to the election,” Collins said.

Collins was a key vote in confirming Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, and she faced a torrent of angry Democrats back in Maine for her decision to back Trump’s nominee. She’s already locked in a tight reelection battle with her Democratic challenger, Maine House Speaker Sara Gideon, in what is shaping up to be one of the more expensive races this cycle.

Collins has long championed her moderate credentials; she supports abortion rights, for example, and has also voted in favor of Supreme Court nominees chosen by presidents of both parties. But the stakes are perhaps the highest they have been for the future of abortion rights in the United States.

She’s also facing pressure from fellow Republicans. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, a hard-line conservative who himself is on Trump’s short list for the Supreme Court, issued a direct plea to Republican senators like Collins, tweeting on Saturday: “Two months ago, I pledged to vote only for #SCOTUS nominees who understand and acknowledge that Roe was wrongly decided. I stand by that commitment, and I call on my fellow Republican senators to take the same stand.”

Murkowski, too, supports abortion rights and is a true centrist within the GOP Conference; she was the only Republican to oppose Kavanaugh's nomination. And on Sunday, she announced she would oppose moving forward with Trump's next nominee. “For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election,” the Alaska Republican said in a statement. “Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed.”

And then there’s Romney. The 2012 GOP presidential nominee joined Collins as the only Republicans to vote in favor of calling witnesses in Trump’s impeachment trial — and he was the only GOP senator to vote to convict the president.

His spokesperson pushed back against a rumor Friday that the senator would oppose seating a new Supreme Court justice before the inauguration in January. Romney’s statement on Ginsburg’s passing did not hint at his thinking on the possible confirmation fight.

Cory Gardner

The Colorado Republican gets his own section because, as a moderate who faces an increasingly difficult reelection fight in a blue state, the upcoming skirmish could make or break him.

His fellow vulnerable Republicans — including Martha McSally of Arizona and Thom Tillis of North Carolina — have already said they plan to support McConnell’s efforts to put a Trump nominee on the Senate floor as soon as possible. For Gardner, the political calculation is much more difficult. But on Monday, he became the latest Republican to come out in favor of holding a vote.

“I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution, not legislate from the bench, and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm,” he said.

The institutionalists

You’ve heard this word thrown around before, especially during the impeachment trial and other Trump-fueled controversies that have tested the Senate. But this time, there are two we’re keeping a close eye on: Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.).

Alexander, who has been serving in the Senate since 2003, and Roberts, who entered the upper chamber in 1997, are both retiring and have less than a few months left in office. They’re viewed as pragmatic institutionalists, who might worry about long-term fallout to the Senate. And the timing of the Supreme Court vacancy means they won’t have to worry about a bombastic tweet from the president hurting their political future.

Both men initially offered tributes and condolences for Ginsburg’s loss, but didn't comment on how they viewed the upcoming battle. However, on Sept. 20, Alexander issued a statement saying he thought a vote should take place.

There is another group of senators McConnell will stay in close touch with during this process to see how they feel, although they're very unlikely to publicly oppose Trump or the majority leader. Instead, McConnell will consult them privately about the mood inside the GOP Conference — some are already part of the GOP leadership team — and the chances for success for any Trump nominee.

This group includes Sens. Roy Blunt of Missouri, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, James Lankford of Oklahoma, Rob Portman of Ohio, Marco Rubio of Florida and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.

All of these Republicans have good relationships with McConnell and are loyal to the party, but they also care about the Senate as an institution. McConnell will not be able to move forward without their support, and some are already giving him backup, including Blunt and Portman.

John Bresnahan contributed to this report.

LIMA, Peru (AP) - Peru’s president survives impeachment vote amidst COVID-19 turmoil.

On Feb. 13, 2016, then-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead in a ranch bedroom in Texas. It was 268 days before the November election and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was quick to quip that there would not be a replacement until the next president was chosen. On Friday evening, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died of complications from cancer 46 days before the presidential election. But McConnell has already made it clear that he sees no reason to wait for voters to weigh in on who should pick her replacement. The Kentucky Republican declared just hours after the death was announced: “President Donald Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”McConnell’s monomaniacal focus on filling the courts with young conservatives will be tested in the next few months by a variety of factors. But the main one will be whether four Senate Republicans will prove unwilling to go along with confirming a replacement for Ginsburg after their party spent 237 days denying Judge Merrick Garland—President Barack Obama’s nominee for the Scalia seat—a hearing, let alone a vote. Already, one of those Republicans, Sen. Lisa Murkowksi (R-AK), has said she would not support filing a Supreme Court vacancy in 2020, citing the Garland precedent, a position she reiterated on Friday night. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) had made a similar declaration. And even close Trump allies—albeit ideologically heterodoxical ones—were making arguments to let the election conclude before filling the post. “Of course they should [wait] but they won’t,” Alan Dershowitz, a celebrity attorney who also served on Trump’s legal defense during the impeachment trial, said on Friday night, reacting to the news. “I’m deeply distressed. She was a great woman, a great justice, and a great American… I think the Republicans are going to try to push it through… If it’s a close election, they will want to have their justices on the bench.”Asked if he had the chance, what he would say to President Trump now, Dershowitz added, “I would say Republicans ought to stick to their position that they took when Scalia died… Let the American people decide who they want to see nominate the next Supreme Court justice.”But elsewhere, there were not many overt calls for patience from Trump world figures. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who chairs the Judiciary Committee through which any nomination must go, had previously said he would also oppose any confirmation during an election year. But the senator also finds himself in a dogged re-election fight, with a particular need to ramp up support from conservative voters in his state. The statement he released after Ginsburg’s death conveyed no position on—and, therefore, no hesitation with—filling the seat. “It was with great sadness that I learned of the passing of Justice Ginsburg,” Graham said. “Justice Ginsburg was a trailblazer who possessed tremendous passion for her causes. She served with honor and distinction as a member of the Supreme Court. While I had many differences with her on legal philosophy, I appreciate her service to our nation. My thoughts and prayers are with her family and friends. May she Rest In Peace.”For Democrats, there are few if any tools they possess to stop a nomination from going through, save mustering up an overwhelming amount of public pressure to persuade those four Republicans to not only oppose a nominee through the election, but through the period after the election until the next president is inaugurated.It’s a gargantuan task. Among Democrats and liberal activists, there was widespread mourning, but also an immediate, historic sense of urgency and calls to action and strategizing. Around 9:30 p.m. on Friday, various progressive groups, including Demand Justice, convened an emergency conference call to discuss the way forward following Ginsburg’s death, according to a source familiar with the matter. On the call, several participants shared their thoughts and prayers, and discussed vigils that would be held this weekend. Publicly, Democratic leader Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) tweeted that “this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president”—adopting, verbatim, the language McConnell had used after Scalia’s death. But to many Democrats, the question was not whether McConnell would push for a nominee, but when. “I think the only question is whether he tries to jam it through now or the lame duck. Either would be a clear abuse of the process but that won’t stop McConnell,” said Jim Manley, a former top aide to then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). “Under no scenario,” Manley added, would McConnell wait until the next president. Manley said that it was his suspicion that the process would happen after the election due to the sheer logistics of getting a nominee confirmed. There was, he noted, the need for a background investigation, a review by the Judiciary Committee itself, a hearing on the nominee, and procedural hurdles that could drag out two or more weeks. The average number of days to confirm a Supreme Court justice is 70, according to the Congressional Research Service. But there is also nothing that prevents McConnell from scrapping those norms and rules altogether, should he want to expedite matters. “Rules are rules, but they’ve long become accustomed to them breaking the norms,” said Manley. Within the GOP conference, there’s less of a clear sense as to what McConnell will do. The Kentucky senator, focused on retaining the GOP majority at all costs this fall, faces a situation where the politics of an election eve Supreme Court fight could have varying effects for his most vulnerable members. A key swing vote for Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), faces the re-election battle of her career this fall, and could burnish the independent image she touts by opposing any confirmation. Other moderates in tough races could make similar calculations. So too could Sen. Mitt Romney—the president’s sharpest GOP critic in the senate—as well as several retiring Republicans. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Outsider’s Champion, Has Died at 87 Here Are the Ways to Stop Mitch and Trump From Replacing RBGTo placate those members, McConnell could hold off until after the election. But he’s not the only actor in this play. Trump has long credited his 2016 win to the conservative voter enthusiasm over the possibility of filling a Supreme Court vacancy. And a potential vacancy at the high court has never been far from the minds of top White House officials. Earlier this month during a formal press conference in the Diplomatic Reception Room, Trump announced he had expanded his list of possible judicial picks by 20 individuals including Sens. Ted Cruz (TX), Tom Cotton (AR) and Josh Hawley (MO) as well as a rising Republican rising star, Kentucky  Attorney General Daniel Cameron. “Should there be another vacancy on the Supreme Court during my presidency, my nominee will come from the names I have shared with the American public, including the original list and these 20 additions,” Trump said during a press conference on Sept. 9.  Trump then challenged former Vice President Joe Biden to release a list of potential nominees—a dare the Democratic nominee  has, so far, ignored. But while Trump recently produced a fresh list of potential nominees, speculation about whom he would pick has centered largely around Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who serves on the Seventh Court of Appeals. In picking Barrett, Trump would please his conservative base but also create a potentially thorny confirmation process at a time when tensions are already at a fever pitch. A former clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia, Barrett has the reputation as a conservative, but in many ways is still untested on major issues that could come up before the Supreme Court. At 48, Barrett would be the youngest of the potential justices Trump has considered for the court and she has the least experience of anyone on the Supreme Court bench. News of Ginsburg’s death broke as Trump was at a Minnesota campaign rally, giddily running through a standard roster of applause lines. As he spoke, he did not appear to know about the political and legal grenade that had just been tossed into official Washington. Two Trump aides told The Daily Beast mid-speech that the president didn’t know, though various other senior administration officials were well aware and preparing to discuss the matter with him, as soon as later in the evening.Amy Coney Barrett, the Trump Supreme Court Pick Who’ll Troll Liberals the HardestThough apparently not yet informed of  Ginsburg’s death, Trump did mention the importance of the court—part of a familiar rally riff that took on new weight in light of the new political reality.  “And that's why the Supreme Court is so important, because the next president will get one, two, three or four Supreme Court justices,” Trump said. “I had two. Many presidents have had none, they've had none, because they're there for a long time."At the White House in Washington, DC, the American flag was quickly lowered on Friday to half-staff in memory of Justice Ginsburg, according to White House spokesman Ben Williamson.As Trump boarded Air Force One, he told reporters he had just learned of Ginsberg’s death. "Just now?" he responded when asked about her death, according to CNN’s Kaitlan Collins. “She led an amazing life. What else can you say? She was an amazing woman — whether you agree or not — she was an amazing woman who led an amazing life.”Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

HONOLULU (AP) - Honolulu officials arbitrarily rejected electronic signatures in an impeachment petition, a lawyer for a businessman who wants the city's embattled prosecutor impeached argued before the state Supreme Court Friday.

Tracy Yoshimura is seeking impeachment of Prosecuting Attorney Keith Kaneshiro because Kaneshiro received notice from the U.S. ...

The State Department on Friday turned over 16,000 pages of documents to a House committee that were previously given to Senate Republicans investigating Joe and Hunter Biden — providing Democrats with key information as a top GOP senator prepares to release a report expected to be highly critical of the Democratic presidential nominee.

The massive document production to the House Foreign Affairs Committee led Chairman Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) to rescind his July subpoena for the documents and pause the panel’s contempt proceedings against Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

It also comes as Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who is leading the GOP probe targeting the Bidens, is teasing a forthcoming report detailing the allegations, which center on Biden’s son Hunter and his role on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company. Johnson has said his report is likely to be published next week.

Democrats have described Johnson’s probe as a politically motivated smear campaign against President Donald Trump's challenger that has already been discredited and tainted by Russian propaganda. The intelligence community has identified a pro-Kremlin Ukrainian lawmaker, Andriy Derkach, as an agent of a Russian disinformation campaign intended to denigrate Biden.

“This ‘investigation’ is obviously designed to boost the president’s campaign and tear down his opponent, while our own intelligence community warns it is likely to amplify Russian disinformation,” Engel said in a statement. “We’re going to make sure the American people see the whole picture, not just cherrypicked information aimed at breathing new life into debunked conspiracy theories.”

Democrats have raised concerns that material gathered by Derkach, who met in December with Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, has been laundered into Johnson’s material. Johnson has strenuously denied the allegations, but Democrats sought the documents he obtained from the State Department to understand the direction his probe is taking. POLITICO first reported that Derkach mailed information about the Bidens to Johnson, but Johnson’s office has denied receiving anything from Derkach.

Derkach has pushed many of the same claims against Biden that Johnson, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, is pursuing. Johnson’s probe centers on allegations that a Democratic public-affairs firm sought to leverage Hunter Biden’s position on the board of Burisma in order to influence the Obama-era State Department.

Johnson has also alleged that Hunter Biden’s role was itself a conflict of interest because his father, who at the time was the vice president, was spearheading U.S. policy toward Ukraine.

Johnson has drawn condemnation in recent weeks for characterizing his probe as potentially fatal to Biden’s presidential candidacy, a political calculation that Democrats said removed any doubt about the goal of his investigation.

Some Republicans have expressed discomfort with Johnson’s probe, too. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) last week described it as a “political exercise” and said he opposed Johnson’s efforts to subpoena additional witnesses as part of the investigation. POLITICO reported earlier this year that Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), then-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, warned Johnson that his probe could aid Russia’s election-meddling efforts.

“It is not the legitimate role of government, for Congress or for taxpayer expense, to be used in an effort to damage political opponents,” Romney said this week, referencing Johnson’s earlier comments that called into question the Wisconsin Republicans’ assertions that the investigation has nothing to do with the upcoming election.

Engel has accused the State Department of racing to aid Johnson’s effort despite stonewalling House Democrats in numerous other investigations, including its impeachment inquiry in 2019. He cited a recent internal directive, revealed last month by POLITICO, that urged state Department offices to provide key documents to Johnson by the end of September.

LIMA, Peru — Peruvian President Martín Vizcarra’s job is on the line Friday as opposition lawmakers push through an impeachment hearing criticized as a hasty and poorly timed ouster attempt in one of the countries hardest hit by the coronavirus pandemic. Lawmakers appeared to be far short of the two-thirds majority vote required to remove...