U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

Didn't the doctors also argue as part of their standing that women having abortions denies them the joy of delivering those babies?

Just a total crackpot case from the get-go, I'm glad it looks like it will lose but I take no comfort in this kind of shit even getting to SCOTUS.

And one of the 5th Circuit judges (a Trump appointee) even bought that line!

“Unborn babies are a source of profound joy for those who view them,” he wrote. “Expectant parents eagerly share ultrasound photos with loved ones. Friends and family cheer at the sight of an unborn child. Doctors delight in working with their unborn patients — and experience an aesthetic injury when they are aborted.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/16/abortion-pill-restrictions-00111499

Fewer pregnant women means fewer people giving up their seats on buses to pregnant women which leads to an overall decline in societal courtesy which leads to more shootings on buses which leads to fewer people willing to ride buses which leads to more carbon emissions which leads to global warming.

checkmate libs.

hey I like to jack it to aborted babies. why don't you care about my aesthetic joy?

NEW: Top Democrats won’t join calls for Sotomayor to retire.

But in interviews with NBC, they’re voicing fears of a RBG redux.

“We should learn a lesson. And it’s not like there’s any mystery here about what the lesson should be.”

w/ @lawrencehurley:https://t.co/ZuERTMYgSz

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) April 3, 2024

we're scared but we aren't going to doing anything about it

I definitely think everyone should learn from RBG, but Sotomayor's 69 with diabetes rather than 80 with cancer, bit of a difference. I wouldn't object if she chose to step down, but actuarially she ought to live at least another four years.

I wish she'd resign.

One plus would be the confirmation hearing could highlight (via evasively answered questions) all the bad and unpopular shit the conservative majority has done and will continue to do.

I mean you know if Sotomayor resigned the GOP would block any Supreme Court nomination until there was a Republican president, right? And Manchin would help them until Republicans retake the Senate this November

They can't block it.

We have a majority.

Manchin won't vote for Biden judge picks that lack GOP support

The retiring West Virginia Democrat called it his "own little filibuster."

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/20/congress/manchin-mounts-his-own-judicial-filibuster-00148147

If every other Dem is available to vote, Harris could break the tie.

so the real question is which other grasping Dem Senator would hold the confirmation hostage until after the election

gives Sinema a chance for a last "Fuck you"

Would a six month battle over a Supreme Court nomination help or hurt Biden?

my point being Sotomayor resigning now is not at all a lock on Democrats being able to replace her with someone of their choosing

But a better chance than if Trump wins.

I agree it's not as clearcut a case as RBG, who should have stepped down as soon as Obama was reelected.

Now, if we end up with Biden reelected but a GOP majority in the Senate, I guess Sotomayor will have to sit tight and see if the Dems can take the Senate back in '26.

like, how many Dem Senators are up for re-election in November in red or purple states who would be just fine with defying Biden over a "too liberal" Supreme Court pick to burnish their centrist bona fides during high election season

Manchin said he wouldn't vote yes if a single Republican didn't.

Collins, Murk, and Romney all joined the Dems for Kentanji Jackson last time. since Manchin and Murk/Collins usually vote as a bloc, I'm having a hard time believing they wouldn't again this time. Collins and Murk are still hurt about being left holding the bag w/ abortion and Kavanaugh (even though it was their fucking fault).

Pressure would be intense on all Republicans to vote in lockstep. Maybe a replacement would go through, but it's not a no-brainer at this point.

pressure was intense on them to do it last time. yeah, it's not a sure bet, but it'd at least make it out of committee and there would be room to maneuver, which it most certainly would not in a Republican Senate.

I don't know how I feel on the issue, but Manchin was also talking about nominees in general and not SCOTUS nominees when he spoke, and the candidate in question had been labeled "anti-Semitic", which doomed his nomination with Ds and Rs alike (which is, yes, fucked up...but practically speaking, not a promise that he's going to sod a SCOTUS nomination).

Don't underestimate the likelihood that the current Supreme Court, or even the Supreme Court minus one, may very well be in a position to decide the next election. Again.

Is this a good time for Justice Sotomayor to resign? I think we should let her be the judge of that.

the justice of that you mean

*checks film*
i say we don’t truss lol

Is this a good time for Justice Sotomayor to resign? I think we should let her be the judge of that.

― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Wednesday, April 3, 2024 2:30 PM (six hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

what is public service apart from the opportunity for self-aggrandizement, after all

it seems to me that, to the extent it exists, the aggrandizement of every justice on the court was accomplished largely due to the president's nomination and the votes of at least half the senate.

as for sotomayor resigning, it might be of great value according to various political calculations, but I hesitate to call her resignation a form of 'public service' when 'political calculation' seems to cover it much more accurately.

she’s a cog in the machine and her time’s up. that’s all there is to it. miss me with this hero worship bullshit

absolutely insane you could have lived through the last 5 years and feel otherwise.

gee, that would hit hard, if I'd even hinted that I worshiped her as a hero. but I don't. so, who's engaging in bullshit here?

christ, now I'm insane?!

Well you do roll with that posse of clowns

citation needed

fucking libs

take your fucking testosterone-driven blurting of whatever nonsense your emotions tell you is real and shove it up your nostrils, sir. I reject your innuendoes and bullshit imputations. go sit on something sharp.

I've taken ten minutes to step away and cool down a bit. But, jesus christ, kev, if I am a fucking liberal, does that make you some kind of fire-breathing radical? a revolutionary? a political savant?

Talking smack on the internet as if you have anything to offer but your anger and you get to direct it at anyone you please on whatever slender disagreement sets you off is goddamn tiresome. And it's not just you. It's half the clowns on the internet and I get fucking tired of it. It isn't radical or revolutionary, it's just as reactionary and stupid as it sounds, but you can't hear yourself.

Aimless, a real chance exists that we'll re-elect Donald Trump. If so -- well, I don't need to explain a thing. Sotomayor's health also means that a real chance exists that she'll die or become incapacitated. Better for her to resign now.

Is there any guarantee Biden gets Sotomayor's replacement through before the election? Or even gets to choose the replacement?

Biden has the power to nominate, the Senate (with Democrats in control) confirm.

Thanks Alfred

be very surprised if she resigned. gerontocracy/entitlement stuff in politics transcends ideological boundaries, methods of gov't, etc. some fantasy scenario in which a dear friend gently engages her on the question and her conscience responds is probably yr best bet here, good luck

I mean, piss on this guy:

In any event, agreement or disagreement, joke or no joke, in my 28 years on the court I did not hear a voice raised in anger in that conference, nor were snide or personal remarks ever made. The discussion was professional, disagreements reflected legal differences on the merits, and the justices tried to find ways to reach court agreements.

Justice O’Connor maintained that a highly important informal court rule was this: You and I may disagree strongly in respect to Case 1, but that fact has nothing to do with our positions in respect to (not legally related) Case 2, where we may be the strongest of allies. That is, no horse-trading.

After conference we would have lunch, often talking about sports or trading so-called jokes and other nonlegal matters. I remember once saying to Chief Justice Rehnquist that I thought it amazing that we were about to have a pleasant lunch when just 20 minutes before at conference we strongly disagreed about applicable law. His reply suggested that he thought only a short time earlier that half the court thought the other half had lost its mind.

What works for nine people with lifetime appointments won’t work for the entire nation, but listening to one another in search of a consensus might help.

Seriously. Fuck comity, who cares if they get along, or go hunting together, or play chess or go birdwatching. I'd rather they all realize the damage being done to the country and its institutions, including theirs.

I don't know what the point of the Breyer piece was. I kept waiting for a transitioh ("But on today's court...") that never came.

The next person to mention Nino 'n' Ruth loving opera gets a pillow to the face. I keep hearing wonders about their friendship; I watch videos of their public appearances where he snaps at her, talks over her, and grimaces in her direction while she takes it.

I don't know what the point of the Breyer piece was. I kept waiting for a transitioh ("But on today's court...") that never came

My take is that was point, that nothing from prior generations has any bearing on the present in U.S. politics and certainly not the future, albeit one Breyer accidentally stumbled upon?

It was a eulogy for "things just working"

Nostalgia for a time when Democrats and Republicans could get along to “end welfare as we know it”.