Trump Suggests Ted Cruz for Supreme Court Vacancy
Left 33%
Center 0%
Right 67%
1 left · 0 center · 2 right
What happened
At a campaign rally in Lubbock, Texas, on Tuesday, President Donald Trump said that if another Supreme Court justice retired during his presidency, he would nominate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Trump said he "wouldn't even have to make a phone call," joking that Democrats would "100% vote for it because they hate the guy and they want to get rid of him" and Republicans would "100% vote for it because they can't stand him, they would like to get rid of him." Cruz, seated in the front row, laughed along. The event backed Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in his race for the U.S. Senate seat Sen. John Cornyn will vacate in January. Cruz clerked for the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, argued before the Court as Texas solicitor general, and said as recently as September that he is not interested in being a judge; none of the sitting justices have indicated plans to retire.
Sourcing check · Mostly on the record · 3 articles
2 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It started with unnamed sources; a named source appeared 14 hours later.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 2 of 3
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: President Donald Trump
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 3
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
- Credits another outlet 0 of 3
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 3
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 28, 02:49 UTC by The Hill, with no named source. First named source 14 hours later, from Daily Wire.
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Cruz has already said he does not want a judgeship, but left-leaning coverage never says so. That refusal appears in Daily Wire and is missing from The Hill. What remains on the left is the gag that both parties would confirm him to get him out of Congress. Without the refusal, Trump's vacancy line reads as a live offer rather than a bit about someone who has already said no.
The sides also split on the verb that frames the night. The Hill says Trump "joked". Daily Wire says he "revealed" a nominee both parties would approve.
None of the coverage asks what would happen to Cruz's Texas Senate seat if the line became a real nomination.
Bottom line
The Hill's Cruz-for-Court write-up never mentions that Cruz has said he is not interested in being a judge, the detail Daily Wire places beside Trump's Lubbock joke.
The receipts — 4 facts one side's coverage lacks
- Cruz has said as recently as September that he is not interested in being a judge
- Cruz clerked for the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist
- Cruz previously argued before the Supreme Court as Solicitor General of Texas
- None of the current justices have indicated plans to retire
The Left View
The Hill frames the remarks as Trump joking and "reup[ping] calls" to put Cruz on the Court in a "vacancy scenario," with the punchline that lawmakers in both parties would "jump at the chance to get rid of him in Congress." The coverage treats the episode as political comedy at a midterm rally rather than as a formal nomination plan.
The Right View
Daily Wire and One America News present Trump as naming a potential pick he said both parties would approve, pairing the unanimous-confirmation joke with Cruz's legal credentials and noting Cruz's recent statement that he does not want to be a judge. Daily Wire also situates the comment against Trump's first-term appointments of Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, which it says shifted the Court "decidedly rightward," and against the absence of any announced vacancy.
Our Take (balanced)
The left's strongest point is that the remark's punchline—confirmation as a way for both parties to remove Cruz from Congress—and The Hill's treatment of it as a joke and a reupped call mark it as political comedy. The right's strongest point is Cruz's Court-level credentials, which Daily Wire cites to present him as a plausible nominee from a president who already appointed three justices. The central unresolved tension is how seriously to read a no-vacancy rally line that Cruz himself has recently said he does not want.
3 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.