- Joined
- Mar 27, 2011
- Messages
- 16,926
- Reaction score
- 5,297
- Location
- Near the gargoyles
- Website
- www.alessandrakelley.com
Supreme Court Justice Kennedy Retiring
- Thread starter Alessandra Kelley
- Start date
I cannot forgive him for not holding on to the end of November - you know there will be a mad Republican scramble to replace him before the mid term elections. I wouldn't have expected him to just hand over the seat, not to mention the Court itself, to the hard right wing without a fight. Maybe his health is failing?
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 16,171
- Reaction score
- 3,734
McConnell could decide to draw it out to make it an election issue. He won on that one in 2016.
Or he might want to get an extremist judge through quick before he loses the Senate.
Losing the Senate is not a sure thing. I don't think we know if McConnell will be looking at an open SCOTUS seat as a vote draw.
Or he might want to get an extremist judge through quick before he loses the Senate.
Losing the Senate is not a sure thing. I don't think we know if McConnell will be looking at an open SCOTUS seat as a vote draw.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 14,708
- Reaction score
- 24,667
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Website
- elizabethbonesteel.com
If all the Dems in congress stand together, can they block a nominee?
I know that's a big "if," but still.
I know that's a big "if," but still.
Nope. After the Merrick Garland episode, Republicans immediately changed the rules so that appointments require only a simple majority. Democrats would need Republicans to vote against the confirmation to stop it.
Honestly, there isn't even any real delaying the Democrats can do. We'll have a new justice seated before the court readjourns in October.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 14,708
- Reaction score
- 24,667
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Website
- elizabethbonesteel.com
I have a friend--who's been wonderfully supportive during a lot of bad times--who voted third party, and still spouts the "both parties are bad" line.
I haven't any idea what to say to them. I don't understand how anyone can look at what's happening and still think like that.
As to what we do next...do midterms even matter anymore? I'm trying to figure out the best way to protect my kid. My life is one thing; hers is just beginning.
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2011
- Messages
- 16,926
- Reaction score
- 5,297
- Location
- Near the gargoyles
- Website
- www.alessandrakelley.com
Sorry, but I don't get where y'all are coming from with this. Anthony Kennedy is 82 years old and has been on the Supreme Court for 30 years. He was appointed by Ronnie Reagan and though he has been a moderate Republican, he is, and has always been, a conservative. A thoughtful one, but a conservative nevertheless.
Why would a Reagan-appointed judge hold off until after the November elections? Kennedy knows Trump is going to nominate someone who won't be a moderating force on the Supreme Court, but will pull it even further to the right for decades to come. Is it his fault that President Obama couldn't push Merrick Garland's nomination through or Hillary Clinton couldn't beat a fucking reality TV show host?
Anthony Kennedy don't owe nobody nothin'.
Please, my fellow progressives. Do NOT make the mistake of thinking Kennedy was the only thing standing between America and the apocalypse. The wheels were already coming off long before Antonin Scalia took a dirt nap. With Trump driving the car, he's going to pull the country so far to the right you won't recognize the place and along with Chuck Grassley and Mitch McConnell, he's filling up the federal courts with future Neil Gorsuchs who will be ready and waiting for Stephen Breyer and the Notorious R.B.G. to fall by the wayside.
Planning on a 82-year-old moderate Republican and a 85-year-old liberal Democrat to hang tough and defend democracy against Trump until the Left gets their shit together, strikes me as a bad plan. Old folks have a habit of getting sick and dying before they can ride to the rescue of young folks who haven't done their part to make it unnecessary for a Kennedy or Ginsburg to hold on to the bitter end.
Elections have consequences. Here's an example of a bad one.
Ab-so-fucking-lutely. You really think Chuck Schumer is the guy to slow the Senate to a crawl with procedural obstructions and filibusters? Eff that. Chuck has his eye on trying to keep as many Dems in his minority caucus as he can while nourishing a dim hope of replacing McConnell as Majority Leader.
Whoever the terrible person is Trump sends up to the Judiciary Committee as Kennedy's replacement, it doesn't change the math. It's still going to be five conservatives vs. four liberals. What changes the math is when Ginsburg or Breyer retire or die. That's when Schumer hopes he's running the Senate and has the troops and firepower to wage war to block yet another Gorsuch clone to ascending to the High Court and changing the balance of power for a long-ass time to come.
This moment was a long time coming and now that it's here, the Left still isn't ready for it. That's too bad because you can bet your butt the Right is.
They aren't taking any chances of any more Kennedys or David Souters flying under the radar and turning out to be independent-minded judges who evolve into something other than what the presidents who nominated them thought they were going to be. Uh-uh. That's all over. Sam Alito and Clarence Thomas are the same assholes now they always have been and they haven't budged an inch toward moderation. Roberts hasn't either and Gorsuch is more of the same.
And so will the next one.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 14,708
- Reaction score
- 24,667
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Website
- elizabethbonesteel.com
This Twitter thread has some suggestions. Won't change the court, but she's right about moving forward.
Well, that's just a wee bit suspicious on the timing... couldn't have waited until after midterms? Seriously? One wonders if someone talked to him...
Also, we are screwed. No two ways about it: screwed is what we are.
Especially after seeing how red the SC is already leaning... pretty sure the next one might willingly roll rights back to just wealthy white landowners at this point.
Also, we are screwed. No two ways about it: screwed is what we are.
Especially after seeing how red the SC is already leaning... pretty sure the next one might willingly roll rights back to just wealthy white landowners at this point.
A big issue in the Presidential campaign was the Supreme Court. Trump even created a list of his top 25 candidates. It helped him win. That list, I believe has grown a bit. Harry Reid got rid of the filibuster, McConnell got rid of the 60 vote rule (or whatever). Trump's nominee will likely be confirmed. But with a slim majority in the Senate and a few squishy Republicans (Collins, Snowe, Murkowski) I don't think the nominee will be a far right-winger. Conservative, of course.
We knew this was coming the second he was elected. It's nauseating, terrifying, but not surprising.
This, sadly, rings true to me:
What I fear is that in the GOP it is not disqualifying to say one will put one's religious faith above the Constitution in a job whose oath requires pledging to do the opposite. We're edging closer to being a theocracy, which I can't believe anyone wants, but many seem to. IMO. Any nominee is certainly going to bring us closer. Again IMO. Would love to be wrong, but from the list I've seen, I am not.
What I fear is that in the GOP it is not disqualifying to say one will put one's religious faith above the Constitution in a job whose oath requires pledging to do the opposite. We're edging closer to being a theocracy, which I can't believe anyone wants, but many seem to. IMO. Any nominee is certainly going to bring us closer. Again IMO. Would love to be wrong, but from the list I've seen, I am not.
Oh, they want a theocracy, all right - so long as it's their theocratic vision (one which looks suspiciously like "I get all the money and power 'cause God, the rest of you eat dirt and enjoy it") that holds sway.
They've already said what they think of the Constitution.
Consider it dead, sooner rather than later, I fear...
Do not despair. If McConnell rushes a Trump (Federalist Society actually) nomination through just before the Nov elections, the anger and resistance, especially among women voters, should serve to amp up the Progressive turnout beyond all expectations. They will lose the House and the Senate and hopefully more than a few state houses.
Remember, we need to control state governments to block further skewed gerrymandering after the next census.
Remember, we need to control state governments to block further skewed gerrymandering after the next census.
Oh, how I wish your optimism were contagious...
But after this week I'm feeling very, very pummeled. Between this, the ongoing federal court stacking, and the rest of it, we're looking at at least a generation of damage, here, before we can begin to recover. If we can.
When I have a little more time I'm going to start a thread on how to frame our arguments and why.
For the moment though, we do still have an awful lot of people who don't appreciate the treatment of women by an almost all white male legislature and an abusive POTUS combined with the outrage over taking children away from their parents.
Here's a summary:
Between the SCOTUS vacancy after the last pick was stolen, Trump's meeting with Putin, holding immigrant children hostage with Trump denying the law that says those immigrants have a right to a hearing, Trump claiming he can pardon, himself, and the 2018 election coming up in a bit over 4 months,...
Can you imagine what's going to happen when the Mueller shit hits the fan?
In addition when we do get the SCOTUS back to reasonable, a lot of those decisions can be overturned on the basis Trump's two appointments were not legitimate if he stole the election.
Yes I am an optimist. What is the point of pessimism?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 14,708
- Reaction score
- 24,667
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Website
- elizabethbonesteel.com
This is my life goal. I'm not an optimist by nature. But you're right.
Someone on Twitter said that this isn't the end of anything: it's the beginning of a war. We need to be forming strategies, not giving up.
Honestly, I can't imagine what will happen when Mueller issues his report will be what we need(ed). His supporters will not believe anything, and the GOP leaders in congress have already shown themselves willing to accept way more than anyone thought they would, and I have seen nothing that tells me they actually have a line they're unwilling to cross. In terms of SCOTUS, we're talking about a swing vote (Kennedy's conservative, but protected Roe v Wade, voted for same sex marriage) being converted to a straight ultra right, ultra conservative vote. That won't be undone. There's no vehicle in our framework for it to be undone.
My .02, we don't need optimism, we need pragmatism.
Well then, you know what you gotta do then, right?
Vote. Vote like your kids life depends on it. Because it could. One day she might mess around and pop up preggers. What to do? An abortion? BZZZTT! The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and now there's states where you can get an abortion and states where you can't. Hope you're living in one where she still can.
Or maybe your daughter falls in love with someone else's daughter and wants to get married. BZZZTT! Nope. Sorry. Gay marriage has gone the way of cassette tapes and platform shoes. The Supreme Court quashed that whole same-sex stuff too.
That is why midterms matter. The House of Representatives has no part to play in judicial nominations except for the fact that many a representative today is positioning themselves to be a senator tomorrow. Wreck 'em when they're still part of the many before they become one of the few, I say! The right-winger whose dreams you crush today won't grow up to be the next Ted Fucking Cruz tomorrow.
One of the shadows that have fallen on the Obama years was the miserable failure of the president and his party to build up Democrats to hold their Congressional majorities and fight to win and hold state legislatures and governor's offices. That failure rings loud and long now. IF Trump nominated the unholy spawn of a Sean Hannity/Ann Coulter tryst to a Supreme Court vacancy, it sure would be nice to see them facing a Senate Judiciary Committee gaveled to order and chaired by Kamala Harris or Amy Klobuchar or Richard Blumenthal.
That could have happened had progressives paid as near much attention to competing hard during the midterms and not just bring their "A" game to the presidential elections. They didn't and now we're fucked. It's not enough to find a general. A general still needs troops and support to have any chance of success.
We have got to get over being butt-hurt and pissin' and moanin' that there's probably no way to stop Trump from putting Kelly Ann Conway up for nomination (if that crazy idea should enter his crazy comb over head) and realize there's nothing that can be done about this opening on the Supreme Court. You can't cry in your beer in Summer of 2018 about what you should have, but didn't do in the fall of 2010.
Missed opportunity. Sucks for us. But the next opening...? Ah, with a Democratic Senate majority, things would definitely get verrrrrrrrry interesting...
The future is guaranteed to no one and fortune, as well as the future, favors the bold. This November is the time to take the power back and if we squander that time, we are putting this nation in peril as well as kids like your daughter, lizmonster. They are the ones who will enter adulthood under the rule of laws interpreted by an aggressively right-wing Supreme Court and hard-won freedom and rights will be taken away and even the history books will not remember them.
If you think five conservatives on the Court is bad, what do you think seven will do? One Justice once quipped, "You can do anything with five votes around here." It could happen and if the Congress stays under Republican control and Trump wins a second term, it will happen. It's only a matter of time and Ginsburg and Breyer ain't gonna do nothing but get older. The other side will wait them out.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT LUXURY.
It's not the least bit suspicious, Brightdreamer. The word was out to Kennedy: QUIT! Chuck Grassley practically shouted it from the rooftop in May when he appeared on the Hugh Hewitt show:
HH: You are also responsible for it, you and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are the hardest-working senators there. And I want to go through the Judiciary Committee record. Congratulations on it. I am genuinely impressed. Are you prepping for a Supreme Court vacancy this summer, Chairman Grassley?
CG: Hugh, it doesn’t do any good to prep for that stuff. I just hope that if there is going to be a nominee, I hope it’s now or within two or three weeks, because we’ve got to get this done before the election, and there’s generally about 50, 60, 70 days between the time a president nominates somebody and we get a hearing in committee, and then another two weeks before it gets to the floor. And this has to be done before the November election. So my message to any one of the 9 Supreme Court justices, if you’re thinking about quitting this year, do it yesterday.
HH: So I want to go back and conclude by what we talked about the Supreme Court. You need them to declare their intent to resign, not to actually resign, correct? Is that what you were saying? If a Supreme Court member is going to step down, you need them to declare their intent to resign yesterday, I think you say…
CG: Okay.
HH: …in order to be ready to go?
CG: Yeah, particularly if they were one of the five that we call conservative.
CG: Hugh, it doesn’t do any good to prep for that stuff. I just hope that if there is going to be a nominee, I hope it’s now or within two or three weeks, because we’ve got to get this done before the election, and there’s generally about 50, 60, 70 days between the time a president nominates somebody and we get a hearing in committee, and then another two weeks before it gets to the floor. And this has to be done before the November election. So my message to any one of the 9 Supreme Court justices, if you’re thinking about quitting this year, do it yesterday.
HH: So I want to go back and conclude by what we talked about the Supreme Court. You need them to declare their intent to resign, not to actually resign, correct? Is that what you were saying? If a Supreme Court member is going to step down, you need them to declare their intent to resign yesterday, I think you say…
CG: Okay.
HH: …in order to be ready to go?
CG: Yeah, particularly if they were one of the five that we call conservative.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2013
- Messages
- 8,582
- Reaction score
- 8,522
- Location
- The Seattle suburbs
- Website
- www.reneedominick.com
Yes. Yes, it absolutely matters. Because the court's job is to interpret the law. It's congress's job to MAKE the law. They could, in theory: expand the court (the number isn't set by the Constitution) or put term limits on judges (an idea Rick Perry championed ohmygodI'magreeingwithRickPerry???); enshrine into law a woman's right to control her own body; enshrine into law marriage equality, just for starters. If there is a strong majority, they could pass laws. The Supreme Court cannot overturn the will of Congress, only interpret it. So yes. Vote. Vote Vote Vote Vote Vote. We won't get any kind of super-majority now, not with gerrymandering, but we can chip away. Complacency is how we got here.
No. More.
And as for that person who still thinks all the D's and R's are all just as bad? Make sure to recite Niemoller's poem at them:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Easy to snipe "both sides" when you're privileged, but you might not always be.
So sorry. I got all hyped up and made the assumption that Little Richard Blumenthal not only had a spine, but balls.
Turns out he has neither.
Yeaaaaaah...no. I've been saying the best remedy to too many Republicans is electing many more Democrats. I'd like to expand on that. The best remedy to too many Republicans is electing many more Democrats---with a fully functional spine AND balls.
Point of Clarification: Please note that when I say "balls" I don't mean testicles. Women have balls too like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who kicked the ass of the fourth-ranking member of the House Democratic Leadership. It takes balls to run against and beat the snot out of any incumbent. For a Democratic Socialist like Ocasio-Cortez to do it without groveling or kissing the ring of the party bosses shows progressives can win and don't have to always pretend to be Republican Lite.