Ruth Bader Ginsburg had died

Author: SupaDudz ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 192
  • SupaDudz
    SupaDudz avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 12,162
    5
    8
    11
    SupaDudz avatar
    SupaDudz
    Rest in Peace to RBG. Thoughts and prayers. The election now gets more important. If Trump wins, expect another 6-3 Conservative house
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,190
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @SupaDudz
    RIP. I expected her to live for a while longer. I guess not. Now we'll see if Trump tries to replace her before January.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,190
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    [Insert vitriolic political argument about replacing RBG here]
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,000
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    her stubbornness in refusing to resign years ago caught up with her.  

    no more lettin john roberts stand in the way of the conservative majority on the court

    this one's for all the marbles
  • oromagi
    oromagi avatar
    Debates: 99
    Forum posts: 4,300
    7
    9
    11
    oromagi avatar
    oromagi
    I don't think there's any question trumpists will surrender all prior moral objections to appointing justices from four years ago and demand an appointment before January.  What if Trump manages to bring the election outcome before the court (a la 2000)?  
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,847
    4
    7
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,190
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    --> @oromagi
    What if Trump manages to bring the election outcome before the court (a la 2000)?  
    Then we all get even more hyperpartisan and scream at each other even louder?

    Hopefully, we don't have another disputed election like 2000. We don't need any more division in this country than we already have.
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 6,773
    3
    5
    9
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    --> @oromagi
    I don't think there's any question trumpists will surrender all prior moral objections to appointing justices from four years ago and demand an appointment before January.  What if Trump manages to bring the election outcome before the court (a la 2000)?  
    What Joe Biden said only applied if the parties in the Senate and Presidency were different, not the same 🤷‍♂️
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 6,773
    3
    5
    9
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    --> @Greyparrot
    This election just got more interesting 
  • SupaDudz
    SupaDudz avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 12,162
    5
    8
    11
    SupaDudz avatar
    SupaDudz
    Indeed. But let's mourn her. Powerful women figure in general. Very honorable women in general. RiP

  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 9,716
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ILikePie5
    well Trump has 3 1/2 months to appoint a replacement. Get cracking.
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 6,773
    3
    5
    9
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    --> @Greyparrot
    well Trump has 3 1/2 months to appoint a replacement. Get cracking.
    The one thing Mitch is good at is getting judges on the bench. Even if there’s one week left, he’ll do it for sure. It’ll be easier during a lame duck session even if Trump loses
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 9,716
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ILikePie5
    2016 election has consequences. When the people elect a senate and a president that have the same goals, they expect them to put those goals in action.

    Or they can do like Biden and not get anything done for 40 years and see how that works out.
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 6,773
    3
    5
    9
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    --> @Greyparrot
    Or they can do like Biden and not get anything done for 40 years and see how that works out.
    Mitch is just following the Biden Rule - if vacancy with same party, fill it in election year, if parties are different wait till after election
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 9,716
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ILikePie5
    Honestly if the public gets upset about a conservative court, it will be the first time in over 70 years that the people actually cared about what the SCOTUS does.

    That's a good thing no matter who wins the election.
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 6,773
    3
    5
    9
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    --> @Greyparrot
    Honestly if the public gets upset about a conservative court, it will be the first time in over 70 years that the people actually cared about what the SCOTUS does.

    That's a good thing no matter who wins the election.
    Imagine a court packing bill being sued and court decides against it lol
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 9,716
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ILikePie5
    You can probably credit the extreme failure of Obamacare for the party flip in the Senate, leading to all these conservative judge appointments.

    The public was downright pissed over that mess.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 9,716
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ILikePie5
    Lol, court isnt getting packed.
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 6,773
    3
    5
    9
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    --> @Greyparrot
    Lol, court isnt getting packed.
    Ed Markey already threatened to abolish the filibuster and pack the Court if Trump fills the seat before inauguration 
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 9,716
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ILikePie5
    Empty threat.
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 3
    Forum posts: 3,190
    3
    7
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    Since it's relevant again, here's a good article on the historical precedents and norms regarding election year SC nominations.
    Some key passages:
    "In short: There have been ten vacancies resulting in a presidential election-year or post-election nomination when the president and Senate were from opposite parties. In six of the ten cases, a nomination was made before Election Day. Only one of those, Chief Justice Melville Fuller’s nomination by Grover Cleveland in 1888, was confirmed before the election."
    "Nineteen times between 1796 and 1968, presidents have sought to fill a Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential-election year while their party controlled the Senate. Ten of those nominations came before the election; nine of the ten were successful, the only failure being the bipartisan filibuster of the ethically challenged Abe Fortas as chief justice in 1968...Nine times, presidents have made nominations after the election in a lame-duck session. These include some storied nominations, such as John Adams picking Chief Justice John Marshall in 1801 and Abraham Lincoln selecting Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase in 1864. Of the nine, the only one that did not succeed was Washington’s 1793 nomination of William Paterson, which was withdrawn for technical reasons and resubmitted and confirmed the first day of the next Congress (Paterson had helped draft the Judiciary Act of 1789 creating the Court, and the Constitution thus required his term as a senator to end before he could be appointed to the Court)."

    That's 1 out of 6 nominees being confirmed when the president and Senate were of different parties and 17 out of 19 nominees being confirmed when they were of the same party. In short, historical precedence supported the Republican-controlled Senate's rejection of Merrick Garland, although the refusal to vote was different. Of course, actually voting on his nomination would  have led to the same result. Also, if the Senate confirms whoever Trump's nomination will be, which McConnell has already promised to do, that will be backed by a strong historical precedent.
  • Mharman
    Mharman avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 2,301
    2
    4
    9
    Mharman avatar
    Mharman
    --> @oromagi
    Keep in mind that the rules were thrown out when the Democrats tried to block Kavanaugh. They tried to block the will of the people, which is what McConnell argued for four years ago. Now, Democrats have made it political. So be it, then. Let us squeeze in a pick before January. This, of course, is assuming Biden will even win, which is up in the air.
  • dustryder
    dustryder avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 919
    2
    2
    4
    dustryder avatar
    dustryder
    --> @ILikePie5
    Mitch is just following the Biden Rule - if vacancy with same party, fill it in election year, if parties are different wait till after election
    Let's try not to justify Mitch's actions under such a flimsy pretext. It is sufficient to say that while hypocritical, Mitch is legally serving his party's best interests.
  • ILikePie5
    ILikePie5 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 6,773
    3
    5
    9
    ILikePie5 avatar
    ILikePie5
    --> @dustryder
    Let's try not to justify Mitch's actions under such a flimsy pretext. It is sufficient to say that while hypocritical, Mitch is legally serving his party's best interests.
    It’s not a flimsy pretext if that’s what he actually said. It is by no means hypocritical. The rule was created by Biden and Mitch just using it. A side effect is that he’s serving his party’s best interest. Historically same party in Senate and Presidency have nominated people 
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 9,716
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @ILikePie5
    As if serving the will of your constituents was supposed to be a bad thing.