U.S. Supreme Court: Post-Ginsburg Edition

is anyone else watching the hearings?

kennedy apologizes to barrett on behalf of the people who called her a racist (? i didn't know about this yet), and says that being called a racist is "one of the worst things you can call someone", says it must have been really hard for barrett.

also says that the kavanaugh hearings were a FREAK SHOW!!!!! (emphasis very much kennedy's) that looked like the cantina scene from star wars.

Kennedy is every Looney Tunes cartoon about the Solid South in one gibbering Crisco-fried package.

Sheldon Whitehouse is killing it, laying out how the John Roberts and the Furious Five has dismantled democracy.

but republicans don't care about democracy as an ideal or as a goal. on the whole they seem to despise it.

well yeah

"we're a republic, not a demo-CRAZY amirite" - republicans

even amy klobuchar made an aside today about how she wishes she were a queen, sometimes, because she would be "benevolent" and it would be "easier to get things done"

but she has no problems hurling pencil sharpeners at her slaves staff.

Senator Susan Collins says she will vote against Judge Amy Coney-Barrett being elected to the Supreme Court.

“It’s not a comment on her,” Collins said. “It is a comment on the process of rushing through a nomination in such a short time before a presidential election.”

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski also said she will be a no vote for the same reason.

Mindy Moderate must have looked at terrifying internal polls.

does that knock this to 50 votes or is this all just pointless posturing?

Romney must be on his prayer mat in the cloakroom.

Two more Republicans would have to vote no beyond Collins and Murkowski, until that happens their votes are pure theater

(and that's assuming that fuckwit Manchin isn't a yes vote)

Doubt it. ACA's too important in West Virginia.

nothing new in this statement but even more than the upcoming election (though that may well change shortly), the apparently unstoppable push to install coney barrett as an agent of retroactivity has been so tremendously depressing that I've worked to tune out daily political conversation.

I read that as agent of radioactivity, and ... that, too.

My favourite video so far.

Under questioning by Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE), Amy Coney Barrett is unable to name the five freedoms protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. pic.twitter.com/U3KFm5FA97

— The American Independent (@AmerIndependent) October 14, 2020

He's flirting with her.

Big 👍

the majority of US Senators are in active opposition to democracy. why should a supreme court justice be a pro at the 1st amendment? being incompetent is not enough these days. it's enough to idly stand by as the republic falls apart. one must take hold of it and bring it down with greater speed. i believe in you amy barrett

otm

the majority of US Senators are in active opposition to democracy

Except for a brief spell in the mid 1950s to the late '60s, so has SCOTUS.

I mentally filled in the missing "not" in KM's antepenultimate sentence.

Showing my hand as a you-know-what even being familiar with the, um, penultimate word in my sentence.

lol

yeah, i missed the "not" in there, whoops! but thank you for putting it back in there

I swear to god I wish people would stop with the "let the people decide" argument. it fucking sucked when it was used on merrick garland and it still sucks. the reason barrett shouldn't be appointed is that she's an unqualified fundamentalist who has indicated destructive court decisions that will last for decades or centuries, not because of "reasoning" pulled out of the collective republican ass because they didn't want barack obama to get his way.

she's an unqualified fundamentalist who has indicated destructive court decisions that will last for decades or centuries

and that makes her smart "brilliant", according to her publicity team

The conservative definition of "brilliant" means "brown nosing intensely enough Fed Society satraps to get Leonard Leo to write your recommendation letters." It also means "not reading the Constitution" and "citing original intent enough to cover your deep contempt for your own profession and learning generally.

Have you guys seen the usage OfMitch yet?

of course, but it's still immensely frustrating, given the dozens of actually real points against, to watch people willingly have zero case (because "the people should decide" is not a case, it's Mitch-issue bullshit)

Prior to the nomination of Justice Felix Frankfurter in 1939, there was a long and solemn tradition of parking legal mediocrities on the SCOTUS. The Federalist Society is reviving this tradition with a vengeance. A very literal vengeance.

What would a figurative vengeance look like?

scowling a lot

Frankfurter's an interesting Earth-2 one-man proto-Federalist Society, though, recommending dozens of his clerks for New Deal positions.

SEN. FEINSTEIN after Judge Barrett explains severability: “I’m really impressed” pic.twitter.com/Qf11molwHF

— Senate Republican Communications Center (@SRCC) October 14, 2020

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_358OhIRqo
#OneThread

Somebody should ask Amy Coney Barrett if she believes Ruth Bader Ginsburg is in hell

— Stan Chera (@neoliberal_dad) October 14, 2020

looool I was saying the other day it’d be funny if someone were to ask her about a pro-Catholic bias on the Supreme Court, oh but this.. this is so much better

i could not watch one minute of this scam

barrett graduated first in her class at notre dame, she knows what the first amendment says. she's playing dumb and lying through her teeth, and that's what's truly offensive.

According to the NYT, 'Amy Coney Barrett on the Supreme Court Could Take Us Backward'. Could. Might. Maybe. Who can say.

I haven’t watched a second of it bc it’s all just so monumentally depressing but unless I missed something filtered through soc media I’m shocked more hasn’t been made of her work on Bush v Gore, particularly in light of uh Trump’s non-concession talk

TBH, I don't find it very significant that she worked on Bush v. Gore as a third-year associate in a large firm.

I just have to say I hate almost every public discussion of "originalism" - conservatives give it too much credit and liberals give it too little. For example I often see stuff like this, which is just blatantly incorrect
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/121595418_4391209287638758_3925704783184384162_n.png?_nc_cat=1&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=ZRAAbE0Lz7YAX_gbBYP&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=a2126ea136cae103c9460aa04143a4ec&oe=5FAF380C

I'm sure there's some constitutional scholar who has put this concept better than me, but I don't believe so-called "originalism" and so-called "living constitution" are entirely incompatible. The very drafting of a lot of the constitution (though not all of it) is so general and vague that it HAS to be interpreted beyond its "original public meaning." In fact I believe it was intended to be treated that way, because it's a constitution, not a statute book. That doesn't mean there are no outer limits on what it can mean. But I think living constitutionalism, within limits, IS an originalist view.

Shhh, Thomas will hear you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOWO--z1S8A

I haven't been watching the hearings, but from the coverage I've seen, it is such a sham, any consideration of why she shouldn't be confirmed is quickly swept into the dustbin of "but she will be confirmed" and equal time given to Republicans calling her the greatest human being ever. Why can't a Dem just tee off on her archaic religious views, ask her if she would submit to her husband's understanding of the constitution if it differed from hers or something? What do they have to lose at this point?

Im beyond bummed about all this and my lib/ centrist political nerd friends seem to just be shrugging, even mildly defending(!?!?) her. Tbf though they’re pretty preoccupied with a danged Cheeto in the White House and are positive he’ll end up in an orange jumpsuit one day. Then snip snap back to brunch.

actually it’s just one pal convinced she’s not “that bad”.