Erik Bates | September 18, 2020
Thoughts on the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg?

Samir Mehta | September 19, 2020
[hidden by request]

Steve West | September 19, 2020
I'm sad to see the most liberal member of the bench potentially be replaced by a conservative nominee. I have little doubt that Trump was secretly celebrating her death. Any nominee before the election won't be confirmed. Sad, sad, sad.

Scott Hardie | September 22, 2020
I'm disappointed that there's not more mourning of Ginsburg, given her stature and accomplishments. But I get it; the presidential election must rapidly accelerate the normal cycle of a Supreme dying and being replaced.

Mitch McConnell is scum. I remain furious at him over stealing Merrick Garland's seat in 2016, and this has dredged it up all over again. This editorial has a bunch of good points, not the least of which is calling out the "calculated insult to your intelligence" that McConnell's words and actions represent.

To be totally honest, I wouldn't even mind Trump replacing Ginsburg this close to the election -- he's the duly elected president and it's his prerogative, and I'd accept it despite my disappointment -- if not for the seat stolen from Garland four years ago. That act demonstrated such blatant disregard for the will of the American people and the responsibilities of his office that McConnell should have been impeached for it by his colleagues. I seethe with so much rage at him that it bleeds over into the Ginsburg replacement.

In the last few days, I have heard people defend McConnell's actions in 2016 as "the Senate's right to approve judicial appointments," as in, it was fair for them to reject Garland because that's their Constitutional right. But the Senate didn't reject Garland! McConnell did that all by himself, by refusing to allow a vote or even a hearing. It was a crime against the American people. The word for that crime is treason.

I doubt that anything is going to stop Senate Republicans from approving Trump's nominee before Inauguration Day. I have read editorials arguing that Democrats should repair this damage by adding more seats to the Supreme Court (mentioned above), but that seems to me hypocritical and just plain short-sighted; If Democrats pack the court to 13 members, what would stop Republicans from taking it to 18 thereafter, and so on? Someone else suggested that the court should have somewhere around 50 justices so that one death and replacement would do little to affect its makeup, but that seems unwieldy to me; I would need to hear experts explain how it's workable.

I want to say something positive about any of this, but there's nothing. What, that I'm glad that Ginsburg's pain and suffering is over? There is no bright side to this.

Steve West | September 22, 2020
I'm also seething at the hypocrisy. I want to be politically informed and educated but I also want to be in a good mood and have a good day. Do you see my problem?

Samir Mehta | September 22, 2020
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | September 22, 2020
Why not? Because that court-stacking would be as pointless as merely being mad about it. Democrats could put a million new justices on the court and it wouldn't change a damn thing; Republicans would top it.

The real solution is going to be changing the system by which these decisions are made: reforming Senate procedures, closing legal loopholes, codifying in law things that are now left to tradition, and putting in real checks on these lopsided abuses of the system. I realize that this is a vastly more difficult fight, because the abusers of that power will resist with every tool they have, but I think it's the only fight worth fighting in the end.

Samir Mehta | September 22, 2020
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | September 23, 2020
As long as we're talking about this, let's remember this crap. When it seemed like Hillary Clinton was going to win in 2016, Senate Republicans (including ones considered respectable like John McCain) openly said they would obstruct any vote on anyone she nominated for Scalia's seat or any other judicial position, for the entirety of her presidency. That's an unacceptable dereliction of responsibility, especially considering the built-in bias of the Senate. I continue to believe that structural reform is the only solution.

Samir Mehta | September 23, 2020
[hidden by request]


Want to participate? Please create an account a new account or log in.


Other Discussions Started by Erik Bates

When There's Not a Dog Handy...

[hidden by request] Go »

Rant #191982

[hidden by request] Go »

Everything

[hidden by request] Go »

Happiness is Lubbock, Texas...

[hidden by request] Go »

The TC Book/Movie Club

[hidden by request] Go »

Anyone in the St. Louis Area?

[hidden by request] Go »

Happy anniversary!

Funeratic began today in 1996.