Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 114

Thread: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at 87; Supreme Court Battle Begins

  1. #1
    Name a more iconic duo BSBH Rookie
    Morphinity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    29,029
    Rep Power
    451

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at 87; Supreme Court Battle Begins

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN26A003

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg became a heroine to the American left after overcoming entrenched sexism in the legal profession to ascend to the U.S. Supreme Court, where she championed gender equality and other liberal causes during 27 years on the bench.

    Ginsburg, who died on Friday at age 87 of complications from pancreatic cancer, was a fierce advocate for women’s rights - winning major gender-discrimination cases before the Supreme Court - before being appointed to the top U.S. judicial body by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1993. The diminutive dynamo became the court’s leading liberal voice.

    Rising from a working-class family in New York City’s borough of Brooklyn, Ginsburg overcame hostility toward women in the male-dominated worlds of law school and the legal profession to become just the second woman ever to serve on the nine-member Supreme Court.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-u...-idUKKBN26A03T

    U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death on Friday kicked off a monumental battle in Congress as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell invited President Donald Trump to promptly nominate a replacement, ignoring pleas by Democrats to await the results of the Nov. 3 presidential election.

    “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate,” McConnell proclaimed on Friday night, without providing a time frame for action by the Senate.

    That confirmed McConnell’s prior insistence that he would do so in an election year, despite blocking President Barack Obama’s efforts to nominate a successor to Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016, 10 months before that year’s presidential election.

    Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer urged McConnell to await the results of the elections that are less than two months from now. He quoted McConnell’s 2016 words on Twitter, saying “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”

    Trump is seeking a second four-year term and has been trailing Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in public opinion polls.

    The likely bitter fight ahead was reflected in early statements by Republican and Democratic senators taking partisan sides on whether a Ginsburg replacement should await the election results.

    Even though Republicans caused a 14-month Supreme Court vacancy by their refusal to consider an Obama replacement for Scalia in 2016, Republican Senator Rick Scott said on Friday: “It would be irresponsible to allow an extended vacancy on the Supreme Court” this time, as he voiced support of Trump filling Ginsburg’s seat.

    Democrats reminded Republicans of that 2016 delay. And Democratic Senator Chris Coons said, “Given all the challenges facing our country, this is a moment when we should come together rather than having a rushed confirmation process further divide us.”

  2. #2
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82,066
    Rep Power
    666
    I don't know if I should be surprised at McConnell's hypocrisy or impressed with his ability to just not give a shit what anyone thinks about his douche-baggery.

    Trump can't be allowed to fill that seat. He simply must be stopped.

  3. #3
    Russian Meddling BSBH Veteran
    josh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    31,528
    Rep Power
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    I don't know if I should be surprised at McConnell's hypocrisy or impressed with his ability to just not give a shit what anyone thinks about his douche-baggery.

    Trump can't be allowed to fill that seat. He simply must be stopped.
    Now do Biden.

    Anyway, RIP. She did great things.
    Last edited by josh; 09-19-2020 at 10:28 AM.
    Bretty Pancakes for #AJT2020

  4. #4
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82,066
    Rep Power
    666
    Quote Originally Posted by josh View Post
    Now do Biden.

    Anyway, RIP. She did great things.
    Don't need to. It's an RBG thread and we're talking about filling a seat, McConnell blocking Garland and now trying to ram another judge in before election. Biden said what he said in 1992, and pivoted 24 years later. Not 4.

    Simply can't be allowed to happen.
    Last edited by Pete; 09-19-2020 at 10:55 AM.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Midget Division
    4EverRangerFrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    4,389
    Rep Power
    89
    Amazing jurist with such an incredible mind. RIP RBG

  6. #6
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    jsm7302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NW NJ
    Posts
    610
    Rep Power
    25
    RIP RBG. Toughest job in controlling and upholding the democracy of this country. Hopefully the court gets the position filled with an open minded jurist whom can keep the court balanced, true to the country's values and constitution.

    (Look at Kavanaugh hearings. No way Trump has time to fill this seat, rest assured.)

  7. #7
    The prince that was promised BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    90,927
    Rep Power
    572

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at 87; Supreme Court Battle Begins

    Trump has plenty of time to fill this seat and almost certainly will. There are over 100 days before the next Congress begins. Even if he loses the election, there's a lame duck period in which he and the still GOP-controlled Senate can push a pick through (provided they have the votes), if only to stimey the incoming Dem lawmakers and POTUS from having a clear path to passing progressive legislation.

    And when they do, it's time to go nuclear and pack the court immediately following Biden's inauguration.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  8. #8
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82,066
    Rep Power
    666
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Trump has plenty of time to fill this seat and almost certainly will. There are over 100 days before the next Congress begins. Even if he loses the election, there's a lame duck period in which he and the still GOP-controlled Senate can push a pick through (provided they have the votes), if only to stimey the incoming Dem lawmakers and POTUS from having a clear path to passing progressive legislation.

    And when they do, it's time to go nuclear and pack the court immediately following Biden's inauguration.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    How would you pack the court when the seat is filled?

    No, they Dems need to grow a pair and do what's necessary to prevent a Trump appointment. It would be disastrous.

  9. #9
    The prince that was promised BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    90,927
    Rep Power
    572

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at 87; Supreme Court Battle Begins

    Packing the court means increasing seats, either by majority vote with a Dem controlled Senate or nuking the filibuster if the margins are too close.

    There's nothing the Dems can do legislatively to stop Trump. GOP control the Senate, who vote to confirm appointments made by POTUS.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  10. #10
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82,066
    Rep Power
    666
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Packing the court means increasing seats, either by majority vote with a Dem controlled Senate or nuking the filibuster if the margins are too close.

    There's nothing the Dems can do legislatively to stop Trump. GOP control the Senate, who vote to confirm appointments made by POTUS.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    Oh so you're not talking the Supreme Court when you say pack.

    Dems can (and should) protest a Trump appointee now, since McConnell pulled his bullshit maneuver with Obama.

  11. #11
    The prince that was promised BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    90,927
    Rep Power
    572

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at 87; Supreme Court Battle Begins

    Yes, I'm talking about the Supreme Court. There is nothing in the Constitution about the number of justices to sit on it and we've gone through history with numerous numbered versions. If Trump and McConnell ram through an appointment, especially in a lame duck, the Dems should retaliate tenfold by packing the court -- by majority rule or nuking the filibuster -- expanding seats on SCOTUS to thirteen or more (Israel seats fifteen). Then nominate and confirm Liberal justices while the GOP are left powerless to do anything about it. Eye for an eye and then some.

    Dems should protest, yes, but are at the mercy of Republican principles, which are utterly self-serving until the election and the New Congress.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  12. #12
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    jsm7302's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NW NJ
    Posts
    610
    Rep Power
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Yes, I'm talking about the Supreme Court. There is nothing in the Constitution about the number of justices to sit on it and we've gone through history with numerous numbered versions. If Trump and McConnell ram through an appointment, especially in a lame duck, the Dems should retaliate tenfold by packing the court -- by majority rule or nuking the filibuster -- expanding seats on SCOTUS to thirteen or more (Israel seats fifteen). Then nominate and confirm Liberal justices while the GOP are left powerless to do anything about it. Eye for an eye and then some.

    Dems should protest, yes, but are at the mercy of Republican principles, which are utterly self-serving until the election and the New Congress.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    You believe if the shoe were on the other foot and the President was a Democrat and had a Democrat majority in Congress, that they would not rush to fill the SCOTUS seat before January?

    Then you have much more faith in your party and politicians than I do in this system altogether.

    In a normal world of acceptance and peace (obviously not 2020- our country is burning) the rules would be the rules and if a justice dies during a Presidents term then yes, they get to nominate a replacement regardless of how close it is to an election. It could work in either partys favor.

    This old song and dance of protesting all things Trump or Republican is getting old. Have some patience, your time will come around again; history shows it always does. But let me guess, no matter who is nominated, they will ve protested and fundamentally wrong just because of who nominated them?

    I could be wrong but wasn't the Civil War the last time there was a fluctuation of the number of SCOTUS justices on the bench? Removing the checks and balances of a democracy to fulfill your political parties wishes as the highest level of government is a slippery slope. These people are elected so if they are sitting there, it is because the people chose them. Some have buyers remorse and will have a turn in the next election cycle to change its course. This is a Democracy ( right now anyway)

    If the last four years have shown anything from one party; it has shown lack of patience and lots of whining and yelling for not getting their way (Nancy Pelosi at the state of the Union sums up the past 4 years for her party). It has shown the desire to employ an eye for an eye justice when they receive power back (which is everything they yell against in the CJ system however). The other party has shown lackluster leadership during some very trying times for this country.

    This is our system folks, if you're not a fan, plenty of other countries with other government systems exist. I do not believe a majority party should change the rules to get their way for the entirety of their term just because they can, its the ultimate slap in the face to Democracy.

    (I still don't believe the seat gets filled by January) Lets show some patience and lets find common ground to stand on as a country as opposed to finding our different viewpoints and yelling at each other ad nauseum for 4 years.
    Last edited by jsm7302; 09-20-2020 at 08:19 AM.

  13. #13
    The prince that was promised BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    90,927
    Rep Power
    572

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at 87; Supreme Court Battle Begins

    Quote Originally Posted by jsm7302 View Post
    You believe if the shoe were on the other foot and the President was a Democrat and had a Democrat majority in Congress, that they would not rush to fill the SCOTUS seat before January?

    Then you have much more faith in your party and politicians than I do in this system altogether.

    In a normal world of acceptance and peace (obviously not 2020- our country is burning) the rules would be the rules and if a justice dies during a Presidents term then yes, they get to nominate a replacement regardless of how close it is to an election. It could work in either partys favor.

    This old song and dance of protesting all things Trump or Republican is getting old. Have some patience, your time will come around again; history shows it always does. But let me guess, no matter who is nominated, they will ve protested and fundamentally wrong just because of who nominated them?

    I could be wrong but wasn't the Civil War the last time there was a fluctuation of the number of SCOTUS justices on the bench? Removing the checks and balances of a democracy to fulfill your political parties wishes as the highest level of government is a slippery slope. These people are elected so if they are sitting there, it is because the people chose them. Some have buyers remorse and will have a turn in the next election cycle to change its course. This is a Democracy ( right now anyway)

    If the last four years have shown anything from one party; it has shown lack of patience and lots of whining and yelling for not getting their way (Nancy Pelosi at the state of the Union sums up the past 4 years for her party). It has shown the desire to employ an eye for an eye justice when they receive power back (which is everything they yell against in the CJ system however). The other party has shown lackluster leadership during some very trying times for this country.
    No, I think they would fill the seat, as is their right/duty. This is an issue of a big stink being made of Garland -- a moderate -- ten months before the '16 election by a score of Senators who cried foul about a made up rule they are now going to pretend never happened in order to give Trump a third appointment in a likely lame duck period in which he'll nominate the Laura Ingram of the judiciary.

    What I'm suggesting is the Dems finally step the fuck up, realize the GOP aren't playing by the rules anymore, and stop worrying about playing by them anymore either. You ram through a right wing judge before the inauguration, I hope it comes back on you ten fold with a flood off liberal judges.

    I'll bath in the tears of foul-crying conservatives as they watch their power grab used against them.

    This is our system folks, if you're not a fan, plenty of other countries with other government systems exist. I do not believe a majority party should change the rules to get their way for the entirety of their term just because they can, its the ultimate slap in the face to Democracy.

    (I still don't believe the seat gets filled by January) Lets show some patience and lets find common ground to stand on as a country as opposed to finding our different viewpoints and yelling at each other ad nauseum for 4 years.
    You don't say...

    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  14. #14
    Senior Member Junior Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,297
    Rep Power
    207
    Everyone on both sides are flip flopping from what their position was on the subject 4 years ago. None of which is surprising. Biden, McConnell, Schumer, etc., but possibly nobody moreso than Lindsey Graham. Even Fox News isn't letting him get away with it. Egg on face.

    Biden a close second with the old flip flop flip!

    Par for the course in D.C.

  15. #15
    The prince that was promised BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    90,927
    Rep Power
    572
    My position hasn't changed. My position relative to the fake rules McConnell bellyached about for ten months has.

    POTUS appoints justices. Senate confirms them. I don't really care who is in charge when. That's the system. What McConnell did was make up some fucking fake rule about not appointing a Justice in the final year of an election year because reasons. Now he and his ilk are having their own words used against them, as they requested.

    Live by the sword, die by it. If they go back on this, flagrantly ignoring their "principles" to pack the court in their image, the Dems should return fire the moment they can and do the EXACT SAME THING.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  16. #16
    Senior Member Junior Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,297
    Rep Power
    207
    Let's not forget this is ultimately Harry Reid's fault by introducing the nuclear option first. A truly stupid and partisan move that Republicans said Democrats would regret. The Republican path to making them regret it by setting that precedent has certainly come to fruition if they fill this seat in time.

  17. #17
    The prince that was promised BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    90,927
    Rep Power
    572
    No disagreement but there's no putting the toothpaste back in the tube. As I said, if the GOP go back on their own principles, I hope it's repaid tenfold.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  18. #18
    Senior Member Junior Division
    rmc51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    5,297
    Rep Power
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    No disagreement but there's no putting the toothpaste back in the tube. As I said, if the GOP go back on their own principles, I hope it's repaid tenfold.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    This would really just be tit for tat. An evening of the scores if you will. If the Democrats make it a mission to repay, then they will ultimately just restart the cycle that they started in 2013 with Reid.

  19. #19
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82,066
    Rep Power
    666
    Quote Originally Posted by rmc51 View Post
    This would really just be tit for tat. An evening of the scores if you will. If the Democrats make it a mission to repay, then they will ultimately just restart the cycle that they started in 2013 with Reid.
    Wouldn't McConnell blocking Garland be the tit for tat?

    If Republicans fill this seat after they blocked Garland, it's the height of hypocrisy (weak excuse about "divided gov't" disregarded). You (the figurative you) can't demand that we start following precedent and rules immediately after you broke the rules.

  20. #20
    The prince that was promised BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    90,927
    Rep Power
    572
    There has been little to no discussion of changing the makeup of the court for eighty years, so most people in American politics know nothing of the history or the law. Here are some facts that I have found to be very persuasive with skeptics:

    The number nine is not in the Constitution. The founders clearly left the size of the Supreme up to the other two branches of government.
    The process for expanding the Supreme Court is the same as the process for passing any law — all it takes is a majority of the House and Senate (pending filibuster abolition). It is no more complicated than naming a post office.

    The size of the Supreme Court has changed many times over the years. Congress made it five justices in 1801. They expanded it to seven in 1807. In 1837, they made it nine. The Supreme Court was increased to ten in 1863. When President Andrew Johnson was impeached but not removed, the Congress reduced the size of the court to seven to prevent him from making lifetime appointments. Once Johnson was gone, it was changed back to nine. Changing the size of the court in response to a political crisis emanating from a corrupt President seems like a pretty relevant historical example.
    Expanding the Supreme Court is much more within the mainstream of American politics than Mitch McConnell’s decision to keep the court at only eight justices for an entire year and during a potentially contested election. Expanding the court requires duly elected public officials following a process outlined in the Constitution to take a vote on a piece of legislation.

    It would be one thing if the Republicans went through the process and then used their Senate majority to vote down Obama’s nominee. But that’s not what happened. McConnell abused Senate rules to prevent Obama’s nominee from even getting a hearing. No one had to take a vote or be held accountable. McConnell rigged the court in 2016. And he and Trump are trying to corrupt it beyond recognition.
    In the long run, expansion should be part of a broader package of court reforms that includes:

    Term limits: Lifetime appointments need to go. Justices are now getting appointed younger and serving longer. Strategically timed retirements like Kennedy’s have politicized the court beyond recognition.

    A code of the ethics: Believe it or not, the Supreme Court does not have a code of ethics to prevent conflicts of interest.

    Lower Court Expansion: Congress used to increase the number of Federal judges to keep up with a growing population and caseload, but politics have kept the number of judges static for a very long time.
    https://messagebox.substack.com/p/ma...tm_source=copy


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If you’re a good loser, you’re a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •