Some political scientists see Harry Reid’s rule change that way.

“From here on in, the filibuster is likely to be eroded, bit by bit,” Michael Mezey, political scientist at DePaul University, said Friday in an email. “Once you’ve gone to the well for the parliamentary option … it will be tempting to go there again even on legislation and perhaps on Supreme Court nominees.”

Norman Ornstein, congressional scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, offered a similar assessment. The pruning might not happen overnight, he said, but situations will likely arise where the majority party, stonewalled by a filibuster on some high-profile legislative priority, will be overcome by the allure of changing the rules – if temporarily – for the sake of passing the bill.

“The temptation to change the process and let it go through that way is going to be almost overwhelming,” Ornstein said Friday. “Once you move down that path, you do remove some restraints. …The Hill

Already there’s movement towards including Supreme Court nominees and legislation in the ban.

Julian Zelizer, history professor at Princeton University, said much will depend on how McConnell and the minority Republicans react to the new rule change.

If the Republicans continue their aggressive filibustering of Democratic bills – or ratchet it up – that will build pressure behind the push to expand filibuster reform to include legislation, he said. But if the GOP’s fear of such an expansion leads them to scale back their efforts to apply supermajority hurdles to Democratic proposals, there would be little momentum for such an expansion. …The Hill