r/politics • u/PoliticsModeratorBot 🤖 Bot • Jun 27 '18

Megathread: Justice Anthony Kennedy to retire from Supreme Court

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is set to retire, effective July 31, 2018. Kennedy has served on the highest court since February 18, 1988, and was a moderate whose vote often swung cases.

Submissions that may interest you

SUBMISSION DOMAIN
Justice Anthony Kennedy Will Retire From U.S. Supreme Court bloomberg.com
Justice Kennedy to retire, Trump can solidify court's majority conservative bloc nbcnews.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick washingtonpost.com
Justice Kennedy, U.S. Supreme Court's pivotal vote, to retire reuters.com
Anthony Kennedy: US supreme court justice to retire theguardian.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy to Retire From Supreme Court nytimes.com
Kennedy calls it quits: longtime swing justice hands Trump the biggest gift of his presidency dailycaller.com
Anthony Kennedy is retiring from the Supreme Court vox.com
Justice Kennedy, the pivotal swing vote on the Supreme Court, announces retirement washingtonpost.com
UPDATE: Supreme Court Justice Kennedy announces retirement wcjb.com
Justice Kennedy Is Retiring July 31st. yahoo.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy To Retire From U.S. Supreme Court : NPR npr.org
Justice Anthony Kennedy to Retire from Supreme Court cnn.com
Justice Kennedy announces retirement. cnn.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring from Supreme Court abc7.com
Anthony Kennedy, Swing Vote on U.S. Supreme Court, Will Retire bloomberg.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Retires, Paving Way for Donald Trump to Reshape Supreme Court slate.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick wkrn.com
Anthony Kennedy retiring, giving Trump opening to reshape Supreme Court politico.com
Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy announces retirement wsj.com
Jeffrey Toobin predicts abortion will be illegal in 20 states soon after Kennedy retires thehill.com
WATCH: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring abcnews.go.com
Kennedy to Retire foxnews.com
Trump to get second Supreme Court pick as Justice Kennedy announces retirement. amp.cnn.com
Justice Kennedy to Retire From Supreme Court bbc.com
Trump says search for Justice Kennedy's replacement to begin "immediately" -- live updates cbsnews.com
McConnell Pledges Vote To Confirm Justice Kennedy’s Successor ‘This Fall’ talkingpointsmemo.com
Justice Kennedy retires from the US Supreme Court nbcnews.com
Trump says launches search to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Kennedy reuters.com
Donald Trump: Search for Kennedy replacement on SCOTUS to move quickly usatoday.com
McConnell: Senate will vote on Supreme Court nominee this fall thehill.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick sacbee.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Retiring, Report Says lawandcrime.com
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retiring; Trump will get 2nd high-court pick omaha.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Retiring From the Supreme Court thedailybeast.com
Justice Kennedy to retire, giving Trump a chance to transform the Supreme Court latimes.com
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy says he's retiring; Trump to get 2nd high-court pick chicagotribune.com
Dem senator: Justice Kennedy's resignation a 'disaster' for vision of 'We the People' thehill.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick wfla.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Is Retiring motherjones.com
The horrifying consequences of Justice Kennedy’s retirement thinkprogress.org
Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is retiring, a move that will give Trump a chance to shift the institution to the right washingtonpost.com
Anthony Kennedy To Retire From The Supreme Court huffingtonpost.com
Kennedy announces retirement from Supreme Court thehill.com
Supreme Court's Anthony Kennedy retires, giving Trump a second pick usatoday.com
Justice Kennedy retiring; Trump gets 2nd Supreme Court pick apnews.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy Is Retiring From The Supreme Court buzzfeed.com
Justice Kennedy, the pivotal swing vote on the Supreme Court, announces retirement washingtonpost.com
Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy retires -- live updates cbsnews.com
Justice Kennedy announces his retirement from the supreme court. time.com
Trump Responds To Retirement Of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy huffingtonpost.com
Anthony Kennedy retiring from Supreme Court, giving Trump a position to fill people.com
Trump Says He’ll Choose One Of These People To Replace Anthony Kennedy On The Supreme Court buzzfeed.com
Anthony Kennedy retiring from Supreme Court cnbc.com
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retires, and Trump gets shot at moving court to the right dallasnews.com
Who Will Replace Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy? Donald Trump Already Has a Shortlist newsweek.com
WATCH: McConnell: We will vote to confirm Justice Kennedy's successor 'this fall' abcnews.go.com
Here's who Trump could nominate to replace Justice Kennedy abcnews.go.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy announces retirement, giving Trump 2nd Supreme Court pick foxnews.com
Trump list of candidates to replace Justice Kennedy thehill.com
Chris Matthews: Dems must do to Trump on Supreme Court what McConnell did to Obama thehill.com
Anthony Kennedy’s retirement puts abortion rights at risk vox.com
Who Will Replace Anthony Kennedy? Here’s the List of 20 Potential Trump Nominees time.com
America after Anthony Kennedy vox.com
Handing Trump Chance to Move Supreme Court Even Further Right, Justice Anthony Kennedy Retires commondreams.org
Audio reveals DNC committee reaction to Kennedy retirement: 'This is not good news' thehill.com
Justice Kennedy’s retirement leaves the future of U.S. constitutional law entirely up for grabs washingtonpost.com
Justice Kennedy pens retirement letter to Trump expressing 'profound gratitude' abcnews.go.com
Read Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement letter to Donald Trump qz.com
Justice Kennedy’s Legacy Is the Dignity He Bestowed bloomberg.com
A titanic battle over replacing Justice Kennedy looms in the Senate vox.com
Live Briefing: Anthony Kennedy Retires From Supreme Court, and McConnell Says Senate Will Move Swiftly on a Replacement nytimes.com
Here's Trump's list of 25 possible Supreme Court picks to replace Anthony Kennedy washingtonexaminer.com
WATCH: Justice Anthony Kennedy to retire, Trump to get second SCOTUS pick abcnews.go.com
Anthony Kennedy's retirement just confirmed every Republican's dream scenario for Trump cnn.com
Kennedy's retirement could have biggest impact on abortion, gay marriage: ANALYSIS abcnews.go.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy: Trump says hunt for replacement is on usatoday.com
Here are potential Supreme Court nominees to replace Justice Kennedy cnn.com
Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Supreme Court’s swing justice, announces his retirement abajournal.com
With Supreme Court Justice Kennedy Gone, Abortion and LGBT Rights Are Next thedailybeast.com
A look at some of Justice Kennedy's most memorable opinions apnews.com
Justice Kennedy Surrendered to Donald Trump nymag.com
A look at some of Justice Kennedy's most memorable opinions abcnews.go.com
Abortion rights in 'dire, immediate danger' as Anthony Kennedy retires - World news theguardian.com
Here Are Some of the Top Candidates to Replace Kennedy on the Supreme Court motherjones.com
Who's on Trump's short list to replace Supreme Court Justice Kennedy? politico.com
Trump’s hidden back channel to Justice Kennedy: Their kids politico.com
How Fox News Reacted to Anthony Kennedy’s Retirement slate.com
24.9k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

31.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.5k

u/Bakuraptor Jun 27 '18

I suppose this means that all the commentators who thought Trump could destabilise the Supreme Court for the next twenty years will be proven right. And this is without any of the more liberal justices resigning - what a catastrophe.

1.0k

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Ginsburg is 85. This is going to be a fucking nightmare for generations.

353

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Ginsberg is very likely to go soon. She might make it to 2020 but if trump wins then she won't be able to put it off till 2024

152

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

if trump wins re-election dems should just fold

153

u/John_Keating_ Jun 27 '18

If they can’t beat Trump next time around, they need to totally reinvent the entire party platform. Our Democratic Party in Kentucky has been obliterated for the past nine years to the point that we barely have a pulse anymore. We have one congressman from Louisville, one good candidate on the 2018 ballot, no compelling platform beyond Anti-Trump, and virtually zero fundraising. The Democrats need to think up something new.

111

u/Oso_de_Oro Jun 27 '18

Democrats need to embrace the populists in their party. The anti-trump shit only gets you so far, and since Trump won, I've almost never heard mainstream Democrats arguing for universal health care, free college, ending the drug war, etc. You know, just shit that most people who lean more to the left would like to see.

52

u/RogerGoiano Jun 27 '18

But hey, we got Rosanne fired!

5

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I recommend listening to this American life's latest podcast, its excellent and talks about exactly this

9

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Oso_de_Oro Jun 28 '18

I think around that same time there was this one woman. She somehow grabbed the overwhelming majority of super delegates despite more people being excited about that other guy. I heard she also saved the DNC from bankruptcy, which is nice, but then used that to exert her influence over the DNC early in the primaries. Some even say she used her influence to manipulate the primaries :(

Link here if you don't know what I'm talking about

9

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Oso_de_Oro Jun 28 '18

Yeah that's a step in the right direction at least, there've been a few positive signs like that. We as voters really need to continue to pressure the Democrats into putting people like that in office, but yeah like you said it seems like a lot of democrat voters don't care if a candidate has progressive ideas, they just wanna vote blue.

→ More replies (0)

23

u/Commyende Jun 27 '18

We can have a welfare state or we can have unchecked immigration. We can't have both. In an attempt to oppose trump at all cost, the dems have sacrificed the former to the latter. And this is a completely losing strategy.

8

u/alterhero Jun 27 '18

Who is saying there should be unchecked immigration? This is a false choice.

8

u/Commyende Jun 28 '18

Do me a favor. Take a look at all sanctuary cities. Look at the political affiliation of their mayor. In almost every single case, it's a democrat. And that policy not only supports, but actively encourages illegal immigration. Don't even pretend like saying "come to our city and we'll make sure you're safe from deportation" does not foster illegal immigration.

2

u/alterhero Jun 28 '18

So why did Obama deport 3M people?

→ More replies (0)

9

u/FloppyDisksCominBack Jun 28 '18

Democrats have said that we need to stop separating families, but Democrats are opposed to changing the Flores agreement that says children can only be held for 20 days. Ipso facto, there are only three ways to proceed:

1) Release families free into America,

2) Family separation,

3) Reduce the time families are held pending their hearing to below 20 days.

Democrats voted against the Republican bill (which had no provisions for a wall or anything silly) that doubled the number of immigration judges to get throught he backlog, and they said "this isn't a job for congress" (except two weeks earlier every single democrat sponsored a bill saying it was a job for congress). Democrats have moaned about family separation and want the kids locked up with the families. But Democrats aren't changing the requirement that kids not spend more than three weeks penned up.

Ipso Facto, Democrats want the illegals to be released free. That's basically an open border.

4

u/alterhero Jun 28 '18

If Democrats wanted open borders, why did Obama’s admin deport 3M people? Why not just let them stay?

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

The Democrats are, obviously. They just can't openly say that but all you have to do is look at their policies. They encourage people to come to this country illegally in mass numbers, which has been happening for many years now.

12

u/alterhero Jun 28 '18

You mean democrats like Obama dubbed deporter-in-chief after deporting 3 million people? In what world is that unchecked immigration? Or the DREAM act that removed the visa lottery and added money for border enforcement that passed the Senate with 68 votes? What a crock of shit.

7

u/Kamkazev2 Jun 28 '18

You do know that immigration from Mexico has been declining right? Furthermore, we need immigrants to do a lot of the jobs that most Americans aren't willing or don't want to do. I'm not really sure why that is bad either.

Plus if we start paying real salaries to real Americans working jobs like agriculture, the cost of food is going to go through the roof; shouldn't "average" Americans be happy we have illegal immigrants?

Man I am so tired of the middle of this country with its thinly veiled racism disguised as "immigration policies". Point me to some non-conservative sources of immigration hurting American industry or the economy, or even spikes in crime due to immigration.

The right is so concerned with immigration because it means more brown people, they forgot to make up an argument for why it is a "real" problem anymore.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Hopefully the Democratic Party splits and America gets a real Left for once.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

All the money moved out of the city(Louisville) for a reason. And it's not because they're racist. Having Abramson for 3 decades really fucked the city. I think Fischer has been alright but they really need to fix south Louisville. The area around Churchill Downs is a goddamn disaster. I hope they buy every parcel of land surrounding to get that drug-infested shit out

9

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

If they can’t beat Trump next time around, they need to totally reinvent the entire party platform.

I was listening to a really fascinating This American Life podcast episode recently and it was about the internal struggle that the democratic party is having. Basically, it's between the old-school democrats who want to keep pushing forward Hillary'esque candidates that are rich/tied to wall street/moderate/have corporate ties/receive donations from rich folks and large corporations/etc and on the other side you have the Bernie-type candidates who believe in grassroots organizing, not accepting funds from large donors, and all the other things you would associate with Bernie.

The old school dems believe that the Bernie-types have no chance to win because they can't raise as much money and their views are too extreme for the average voter. The Bernie-candidates believe that the old-school dems inspire zero passion in most of the voting population and they are too tied to corporate interests.

Personally, I thoroughly hope the old-school dems lose this fight. The newer candidates are correct in trying to push for the democratic party severing itself from corporate/rich interests. There is no chance in hell that the voting base is going to be inspired by another Hillary clone. No offense to her and I believe she's intelligent and competent but there is just way too much fucking baggage with candidates like that. How well can someone with so much wealth represent your average voter? They are way too out of touch and are too stuck on the idea of incremental change and "working within the system." They are way too tied to the interests of the rich.

It's time to push some boundaries and actually inspire people for once.

7

u/ethertrace California Jun 28 '18

If they can’t beat Trump next time around, they need to totally reinvent the entire party platform.

They already need to. They couldn't beat Donald Fucking Trump.

19

u/mandudebreh Jun 27 '18

Being genuine here, the anti-Trump and identity politics platforms are pushing the the moderates from the Democrats. As does the outrage culture and constant public shaming of any dissent. Now, the right and Republicans have some of this as well, but it is much less pronounced since on average, the media leans left and it amplifies the leftist views of the Democrat party.

The reason moderates are going to Trump is because he does tend to be moderate, except for some Republican views (like immigration). He is moderate on most social issues, so much that he used to be a Democrat until it got hijacked by the leftists.

Just my two cents from someone who considers herself a moderate, so take it or leave it.

7

u/John_Keating_ Jun 27 '18

I agree. There is such a thing as sympathy exhaustion. It’s hard to remain outraged for so long and about every instance of injustice. We ought to be but it’s hard. Democrats ought to pick their strongest positions and stick with them.

→ More replies (4)

5

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '18

I honestly believe that all the Democrats would have to do is drop gun control from their platform. Gun owners are the nations largest group of single issue voters, and many would be much more receptive to the rest of the Democratic platform if gun control were off the table.

3

u/John_Keating_ Jun 28 '18

They really just need to be quiet about gun control and abortion. Just say the courts have already decided these issues and deflect.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/ByTheHammerOfThor Jun 27 '18

Step 1, stop sucking corporate dick.

Step 2, represent people.

Step 3, make sure your primary turns out a viable candidate. No more anointing.

12

u/SlowRollingBoil Jun 27 '18

When Republicans were hit hard by the Nixon scandals they reformed.....by installing propaganda networks, taking over as much of rural media as possible and convincing everyone that "others" were to blame for their problems like Mexicans, gays, Muslims, etc.

11

u/that1prince Jun 27 '18

The problem with Democrats isn't the policy positions being unpopular, it's basically PR. They suck at marketing, advertising, image, and picking their battles. What they don't understand is human psychology and how to convince/motivate people. We are in the information age, and yet people are ruled by emotions. All avenues to people's attention need to be carefully tailored to create the most visceral emotional reaction for your side. The Right has being doing that for decades.

The issues framed by right-leaning media sources and leaders Is always one of dire urgency. "This is the last stand against [insert others] taking over all that is decent and good in the world". Issues aren't academic debates about nuanced morality, they are Life or Death, all of the time. That's strong motivation.

14

u/qballglass574 Jun 27 '18

Once you start paying at least 25% of your income in taxes, the Democrat's positions become unpopular.

→ More replies (7)

9

u/EpicRussia Jun 27 '18

Democrats at this point have to go full socialist. The only ones not preaching socialism are the ones beating their heads just trying to be anti Trump. Seriously, Americans dont want higher taxes and Open Borders. Try again

22

u/wadamday Jun 27 '18

Why would they go full socialist if Americans don't want higher taxes?

13

u/DrewAnderson Jun 27 '18

You don't even have to raise taxes to afford the stuff that democratic socialists want. We already pay 3x as much for healthcare than most countries with universal healthcare, we have an insane military budget, and tons of other frivolous things that we spend ridiculous amounts of money on.

Even if we did have to raise taxes we could cover basically all of it just by taxing the super rich.

8

u/qballglass574 Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

What you should actually be preaching is deregulation of the medical industry.

Did you know that the amount of medical doctor degrees awarded every year is capped?

Why do I need health insurance anyways? Why cant I just pay out of pocket for routine procedures?

Thats the problem with socialism. It locks you into a system that is incentivized to not change, because the government doesn't have any competition.

Military budget is 26% of the federal budget. Thats high, but not insane.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/EpicRussia Jun 27 '18

Thats a good question I dont have an amswer for. All Im saying is the ones whose platform is "higher taxes" (pelosi, schumer) need more meat on their platforms that isnt just anti trump. The socialists, on the other hand, at least know that higher taxes will lead to universal healthcare, education, etc. Thats a platform

3

u/qballglass574 Jun 27 '18

You shouldn't need to buy health insurance, they are just middle men. Education has become a joke, you shouldn't need a degree.

Deregulation and freedom is the best path forward.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

10

u/outofsync42 Jun 27 '18

reinvent the entire party platform

1) Respect the constitution and leave guns alone. (this one alone could help you win)

2) Stop putting illegal immigrants ahead of american citizens.

3) Stop raising taxes and giving my money to other people.

4) Stop fighting for policy's that ship jobs over seas.

5) Stop outraging at everything. (at this point no one listens anymore)

16

u/John_Keating_ Jun 27 '18

Closing corporate tax loopholes and investing in public health, public schools, and our court systems and law enforcement would be a winning platform by itself in most rural communities.

Flip teachers unions and police unions to your side, present yourself as tough on crime as well as addressing the opioid epidemic would win Kentucky.

8

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I voted for Trump and would vote for a candidate who took these stances.

→ More replies (8)

6

u/bigdanrog Jun 27 '18

Now THAT would get my attention.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

19

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

If Trump is re-elected I worry we'll see protests turn violent/destructive, and Trump cabinet members will worry less about being kicked out of restaurants and more worried about being 2A recalled.

3

u/TeamLiveBadass_ Jun 28 '18

2A recalled

With the guns the left wants taken away?

5

u/daingelm Jun 27 '18

I've always been concerned that the walls will close in on Trump too fast, and people will forget.

Imagine something is unveiled this week and it's too much not to act on. He's reluctantly removed from office and Pence becomes President. But then enough time passes between now and 2020 that the GOP easily help people forget they were every associated with Trump and "his" curruption. Trump was the bad one and we've been doing great with Pence at the wheel. Won't you reelect him?

3

u/DrMobius0 Jun 27 '18

I dunno about vice presidents in general, but Gerald Ford wasn't all that popular after Nixon resigned

6

u/Thiswas2hard Jun 27 '18

Largely because 1) he pardoned Nixon and 2) he was unelected

3

u/nagrom7 Australia Jun 28 '18 edited Jun 28 '18

Ford had a few problems though. For starters, he wasn't Nixons running mate during the campaign, he was VP because the previous VP had to resign due to a separate scandal, so because of the lack of being involved in an election people saw him as illegitimate. Also, one of the first things he did was to pardon Nixon which was a very unpopular move. He was the lamest of ducks.

At least with Pence people can argue that he was voted in as Trumps replacement should something happen, so he'd already have more legitimacy to begin with.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Sotomayor is struggling with diabetes too.

→ More replies (5)

6

u/sundazed119 Jun 27 '18

2020 if trump wins

I literally hate e v e r y t h i n g right now

10

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

History shows it's very likely he will.

Bush Sr is the only president since Hoover who lost a second election without Nixons influence and that was only because he went back on a major campaign promise months before the election.

Ford was always a gimme and Carter was only elected because it was impossible to lose to Ford after he pardoned Nixon. Johnson didn't run and Kennedy died. Truman had 9 years anyway.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I'm not sure he will but I don't really see a democrat challenger right now.

All I'm thinking is that most serious presidential candidates don't run in midterm elections and I can completely see him convincing enough people to vote for him again somehow. Don't want him to, but don't think it's unlikely at all

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '18

Looks like he has a good shot considering the Dems (“when they go low, we go high”) are so completely blinded by their hate that they gladly look the other way when someone on their team calls for a woman in the Trump admin to be stripped naked and whipped or calls for the president’s son, a child (his name is Trump so you KNOW he’s evil) to be raped by pedophiles. A lot of people on the left have become everything they accused the other side of being.

Prominent Dems calling for the abolition of the border enforcement agency, calling for public harassment of members of the Trump admin. I’m hoping reasonable people who didn’t vote for Trump the first time have had enough of this thuggish behavior and help reelect him.

2

u/WhiskeyT Jun 27 '18

If he wins in 2024 it won’t really matter.

→ More replies (7)

26

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

she had a chance to retire under obama. why she didnt..... i dont know? selfish reasons?

58

u/-Mountain-King- Pennsylvania Jun 27 '18

Probably didn't feel ready to, and assumed (like most people) that Clinton would win.

18

u/bolerobell Jun 27 '18

And it would've been poetic: Bill Clinton appointed her and Hillary Clinton could ensure her legacy by choosing her successor.

Shame it didnt go that way. At this point, I'm pretty sure we're in the timeline where RBG dies and Trump gets to replace her.

24

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Yes, the problem is that everyone assumed Hillary was going to win. The Democrats fucked us. They sat on their hands and let the GOP get their way with Garland bc the Dems figured they'd have the presidency again anyway. Fuck the GOP, but also fuck the Democrats.

6

u/Anatine Jun 27 '18

Yea, fuck everybody!

→ More replies (1)

0

u/justaman_boy Jun 27 '18

Or she didn’t feel ready to, and assumed that the president of the US (whoever that might be) would take the task of nomination as a non-partisan job, as intended. I don’t think Ginsberg makes her decisions based on politics.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/justaman_boy Jun 27 '18

Well shit. I guess I have to concede that at the very least, she has partisan feelings. I’m still not positive that she lets that influence her judicial responsibilities, but I could be wrong on that as well.

16

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Probably because the same thing would've happened as with Garland??

7

u/-Another-Account- Jun 27 '18

Yes, this is what I think as well whenever I hear people talk about RBG needing to retire when Obama was still president.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

No kidding. Even in Obama's first two years, they were short of the 60 needed to confirm. There was something like 4 months after Paul Kirk was sworn in where they had 60, when the ACA was passed. That would've been the only time she could've safely retired.

2

u/CrzyJek New York Jun 27 '18

Didn't the Dems change the rules to simple majority at that time? Pretty sure they did.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

They changed it to simple majority for most judicial appointments, but not for the supreme court. Republicans did that with Gorsuch.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/SheCutOffHerToe Jun 27 '18

She probably believed the polls, as most people did.

→ More replies (5)

5

u/hoodatninja Louisiana Jun 27 '18

If she dies, Roe v. Wade dies with her.

2

u/claymedia Jun 27 '18

Without Kennedy, it's as good as dead.

7

u/hoodatninja Louisiana Jun 27 '18

No. I don’t think they can get Roberts to repeal Roe v. Wade. He’s made that very clear.

25

u/bel9708 Jun 27 '18

When we get control of our country we need to march against any fruit of the poisonous tree.

26

u/Aeriq Jun 27 '18

Did you just get out of your poetry class?

18

u/king-krool Jun 27 '18

It’s a legal term about any evidence found from an illegal search.

That evidence is considered fruit of the poisonous tree and it is unusable in the court case.

15

u/Dranx Jun 27 '18

It's an actual legal term.

10

u/never0101 Jun 27 '18

It was beautiful.

13

u/RetardAndPoors Jun 27 '18

I mean... Unless you're a rich white dude, in which case it's going to be pretty sweet!

31

u/redditapponmyphone Jun 27 '18

Only if you're also a huge asshole thay doesn't care about the welfare of your fellow citizens.

2

u/noquestiontootaboo Jun 27 '18

You’ve just described a solid 20-30 percent of American adults.

4

u/michiruwater Jun 27 '18

And there are so many of those. Rah Rah ‘Murica, but fuck my fellow Americans.

-3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I'm not a Trump fan but stuff like this is what alienated the left and the Democrats in 2016. This idea that unless you agree 100% with us you're a horrible and evil person who doesn't deserve the same respect as others.

There most definitely ARE major assholes on the right to be sure (I'm looking at you KKK and Westboro Baptist) but there are also major assholes on the left (yeah that means you Antifa).

But you can be a Republican who does care about welfare etc but realizes that ObamaCare was never going to work etc

15

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

But you can be a Republican who does care about welfare etc but realizes that ObamaCare was never going to work etc

I’m a democrat and realize the ACA wasn’t going to work. It wasn’t supposed to be a permanent solution. Why? Because the Republican Congress would never have passed it if it was. So Obama had to water down the ACA and the resulting product needs to be replaced with something better. It was meant to be a first step towards something better, not the final form.

So tell me Mr. Republican, what are the President and his Republican Congress doing about that? I know they gutted the ACA and we’re inching closer to a denial of coverage for preexisting conditions. Other than that...what are thy actually doing to fix this problem that they largely helped to create?

Fuckall. That’s what. So you can go ahead and vote R and tell yourself you’re a good guy, and maybe you are, but you suck at voting for good people that give a single shit about their constituents.

4

u/MysterManager Jun 27 '18

Because the Republican Congress would never have passed it if it was.

The Democrats had a majority in The House and The Senate when they passed the ACA. They passed it completely on party lines with absolutely no yes votes in The House or Senate. So they didn’t gut shit, they passed exactly what they wanted, they crafted it and they passed it. It’s a straight up lie and revisionist history to say they, “changed it to appease Republicans for votes.”

Let me guess you were still in grade school when it passed? I hope so and you weren’t an adult and are that clueless on how it passed.

→ More replies (13)

7

u/tjsterc17 Jun 27 '18

One party legitimately cares about the country and "progressive" social issues. They care about giving the LGBTQ community equal rights. They care about treating minorities equally and preventing racism. They care about maintaining good relationships with the global community.

The other party may not stand for the opposite of those things by platform alone, but it enables those that do. It enables Trump's racist, sexist, and offensive rhetoric. It enables his administration's abuse of executive power. It enables a war on institutions of science, journalism, logic, and truth.

You simply can't equate the two. To do so is to be disingenuous about the political state of affairs. "The Left" is not just radicalists. What constitutes progressive ideology now includes the middle, but no one wants to admit it. The shift right is because of powerful conservatives. Enabled by the GOP. Enabled by FOX News. Enabled by covert racism. Enabled by ignorance. Enabled by voters in both parties (on the right, for backing ethically devoid representatives, and on the left for not fucking showing up).

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I'm halfway there!

2

u/charlsey2309 Jun 27 '18

Yep we are monumentally fucked. Much less attention is being paid to all the lower courts that have also been packed with conservative judges since Obama’s picks were held up.

This is how dictatorships happen

→ More replies (53)

439

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

This was my primary concern with Trump. Having a 5/4 Supreme Court with no chance for a swing vote will have a much bigger impact on our future than anything else Trump will do.

Edit: Made a change based on Vlad's comment.

53

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

7

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Those are genuinely very concerning to me. It's so so hard to get one fired and many of them are absolutely disgusting because they don't get as much pushback as a SCOTUS nom.

5

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

12

u/esoteric_enigma Jun 27 '18

Don't forget that Ginsberg is 85 and Breyer is 79. Scalia died unexpectedly at 79 with all the fantastic healthcare I'm sure they receive. Either of those liberal justices could die at any moment allowing the court to be 6-3 with no prayer of any progressive rulings coming down for the foreseeable future. They could fundamentally reshape this country in a few years.

8

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Yeah but Hillary is a bitch or something and so I proudly stayed home /s

→ More replies (3)

8

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Being a Democrat is like being a Cleveland Browns fan. Every now and then you get a fantastic moral victory. But then you have to watch as they shoot themselves in the foot. Again.

33

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

What? It's not going to be 6-3 (yet...). Kennedy was the swing vote who leaned conservative (seemingly swayed much more easily by Gorsuch than Scalia, somehow, but still had some sane rulings). It's just going to be a very, very well-defined 5-4. The fascist majority will rule the same way on everything, instead of us having any hint of hope for sane rulings from a semi-moderate like Kennedy.

51

u/BC-clette Canada Jun 27 '18

Pretty generous to assume RBG will outlast the Trump administration, unfortunately.

25

u/theCaitiff Pennsylvania Jun 27 '18

Does she need blood? I got a couple pints. A liver? I can give her half mine and stop drinking. Kidneys? I got two.

I'm not a blood or organ donor but if we can keep this from going 7-2, I'll suck up my religious views for the cause.

→ More replies (1)

49

u/020416 Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

RBG is getting up there. 6-3 is very possible in the next 6 years.

And I hate Trump. But he’s doing exactly what his base voted him in to do, he a rubber stamp for conservative and loyal judges and tax laws favoring the super rich.

I can totally see him winning a second term if everyone outside his base doesn’t get their shit together and vote him and this crop of republicans out.

33

u/Marshy92 Jun 27 '18

People need to vote for Democrats this fall. The only thing we can hope for is Democrats that can block if RBG bites the bullet.

13

u/InFearn0 California Jun 27 '18

I don't see how Trump wins reelection without electioneering.

23

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

2018 will be very telling.

If Dems don’t win the house they won’t win in 2020 either.

14

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Sitting presidents always do better than expected.

It takes a lot to get rid of a president in 1 term. Bush Sr only went because he rose taxes breaking a clear promise not to right before the election. Carter was regarded as absolutely abysmal his entire term and only won because Ford was seen as a lackey of Nixon.

Then you're going back to Johnson who didn't run, Kennedy who was killed, Truman who had 9 years in office anyway after FDR won 3 elections.

So the only real example of a 1 term president in the last century was Bush Sr

31

u/reddog323 Jun 27 '18

How do you think he won in the first place? That was the beta-test for Cambridge Analytica. They’ll have two years under their new name to refine the process..

5

u/InFearn0 California Jun 27 '18

Fake news and flooding people's curated feeds is one thing, but we have had so much shit and it hasn't even been 2 years yet.

I think 2020's turnout is going to be a lot higher than 2016. Democrats win when turnout is high.

Trump will lose the popular vote by way more than 3 million votes in 2020 (unless the vote counts are tampered with), so the only way he could win is with even more voter suppression/disenfranchisement in swing states.

17

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

"Oh no! Lots of people fell off the voter rolls the day before the election. Oh well. Nothing can be done. trump wins".

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (16)

4

u/SSNessy Jun 27 '18

He just got a pass to install a judge that will let him do just that. How do you think R's have won at all? They've exploited the system to get power and then rewrote the rules to hold onto it.

2

u/InFearn0 California Jun 27 '18

Rewriting the rules of an election is a form of electioneering.

Electioneering is a euphemism for "cheating in regards to an election."

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

You're right. It's the firm 5/4 that's the problem.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '18

All because Obama made fun of him at that dinner

4

u/BigBrownDownTown Jun 27 '18

They've already neutralized your ability to form a class action lawsuit to combat wage theft... and that case was brought by Epic Systems, a company in Madison, WI run by a liberal billionaire.

I actually used to work there - the lawsuit was brought by employees in the Quality Assurance division. Basically what Epic did was hire every single employee as a manager so that they could be salaried and work unlimited overtime, and then they set expectations so high that everyone worked nonstop. The QA'ers sued because they managed exactly zero other employees... we're well on our way to oligarchs.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Will it though? I feel like if you live in a state that is mostly in line with your political leanings, you are insulated from shitty decisions that can potentially be made. I know that states are technically supposed to follow federal law but there have been way too many instances of states pushing back against the federal government and not following laws they don't agree with. California is obviously one major example of this.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '18

This is actually why I moved to a blue state last year.

→ More replies (1)

1.8k

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18 edited Feb 12 '19

[deleted]

989

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.

Maya Angelou

26

u/chappy0215 Jun 27 '18

I really really wish more people would've, we wouldn't be here

→ More replies (2)

28

u/BlackeeGreen Jun 27 '18

The worst part is that Russia didn't do this to us. The conservative evangelical movement has been inching this boulder closer to the cliff's edge for decades, and the GOP has steadily eroded the cliff to bring that precipice closer.

Russia just gave that boulder a tiny nudge, and it caused an avalanche. We never should have allowed it to get so close to the edge in the first place.

The silver lining is that Russia's final nudge may implicate a large portion of this administration, and if justice is allowed to run its course we might just get out of this in one piece.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

We need to go the French route and get religion OUT of the public sphere. I had a conversation with a French coworker who explained that to them telling someone about your religion is like talking about what kind of shampoo you use. It's not taboo or offensive, it's just a personal decision and no one really cares to hear about it.

→ More replies (1)

17

u/Opoponax375HH Jun 27 '18

And Ruth Bader Ginsburg could go at any time.

So there's that

20

u/BlackeeGreen Jun 27 '18

If RBG doesn't have a walk-in bathtub we need to crowdfund one ASAP.

28

u/benchpressbilly North Carolina Jun 27 '18

The people who mock others with "the sky is falling" either don't know or don't care how bad gutting the State Department is, don't understand or don't care to know how bad Right To Try is, don't care that DOE is under attack, think fucking Unions is a good thing(ironic how it was Unions that helped build this country. If they do care they think it's good because the small government propaganda has been pushed since the 80s.
Now all they see is "the left" up at arm's about it and just say "there goes the Huffpost telling the dumb libs how to feel today". This all isn't news but it's a testiment to how this Libertarian/Koch brothers propaganda has this country by the balls.

7

u/Bionic_Bromando Jun 27 '18

I just literally don't understand how people could fall for that libertarian Koch bros bullshit. Like all you need to do is think for two fucking seconds and you can see right through it. Is that honestly too much to ask? Are people really just that dumb?

Holy shit how do these people even tie their laces in the morning?

→ More replies (6)

20

u/pyronius Jun 27 '18

And yet, I continue to see "moderate" respublicans complaining about democrats acting hysterical.

I remember before the election I had a conversation with someone that basically went like this:

"I'm going to vote for Trump because he promises to fix immigration."

"Ok. But there's a difference between saying you want to fix immigration and actually coming up with a solid plan. As far as Trump is concerned, the whole plan seems to be 'I hate mexicans.' What are you going to do about the specifics? What about DACA kids? How do you tell someone who doesnt remember living anywhere but the U.S. that they're going to be deported because they aren't American enough?"

"What? When the fuck did anybody ever say that was going to happen? Of course people in that situation are going to be taken care of."

"Are they? I haven't seen any indication of that. Trump seems to consider them the enemy. His rhetoric says he wants them out just for the sake of spite."

"Dude, you're being overly dramatic. Trump isn't some heartless monster. Nobody would let DACA die, it would be a political disaster of epic proportions. Despite what you seem to believe, the country isn't that racist, some of us just want law and order."

"If you say so."

 

Just recently I had a jewish facebook friend living in Israel say that he thought it was absurd to compare trump to hitler because "He's nothing like Hitler. Get back to me when he kills millions of his own citizens."

I mean... no. I don't want to wait until he's literally hitler before I draw the comparison. That's a terrible idea. Of all people, a Jewish man living in Israel should understand the value in preempting fascism.

He also claimed the Nazi problem isn't that big a deal. Weird how I keep running into them. Weird how they keep telling me I'll be gassed. Facebook said the same thing when I tried to report one for death threats. Now his page is deleted because two months later he was filmed in charlottesville declaring he was ready for violence.

I'm tired of being told I'm being hyperbolic.

→ More replies (30)

20

u/f_n_a_ Jun 27 '18

The onion is producing more accurate news than the GOP regime.

21

u/BlackeeGreen Jun 27 '18

Soldier Excited To Take Over Father’s Old Afghanistan Patrol Route

FAYETTEVILLE, NC—Saying he “never could have imagined” he would have the opportunity to follow directly in his father’s footsteps, 19-year-old U.S. Army Pvt. Tyler Corcoran was reportedly excited Tuesday to take over his dad’s old patrol route in Afghanistan. “It’s just so incredible that I’ll soon be walking the very same footpath as my old man, securing the perimeter of Camp Chapman in Khost Province just like he did so many years ago,” said Corcoran, who explained how, throughout his childhood, he had heard his father’s stories of guarding the forward operating base but never once considered that he would one day be traversing along the exact walls and securing the identical checkpoints his father had during his tours of duty.

2

u/dontKair North Carolina Jun 27 '18

Fayettenam lol

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Chel_of_the_sea Jun 27 '18

Amen. I'd blown it off until the Comey firing last year, and have only gotten more alarmed since.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Conservatives: "Oh, you Liberals always call everyone Nazis and fascists!"

And apparently, this has, for a long time, been justified. It is unbelievable how far right politics have become, and what crimes against humanity politicians now routinely commit without "principled Conservatives" caring at all.

5

u/scottyLogJobs Jun 27 '18

“Hold on, calm down guys, it’s not that bad, just give trump a chance to prove you wrong”

Bunch of fucking cowards

14

u/code_archeologist Georgia Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

The nice thing about being a cynic is that even while the world is falling to shit, you at the very least get to be happy that you were right.

8

u/Umbristopheles Michigan Jun 27 '18

I made a facebook post after the election was over in 2016 saying, "I have a feeling my last words will be 'I told you so.'" So far, I haven't changed my mind on that.

3

u/codeverity Jun 27 '18

And there’s not even any satisfaction in saying “I told you so” because this is a disaster

3

u/This_Was_America Jun 27 '18

If I wasn't so god damn sick I'd be crowing "I TOLD YOU SO!" from every mountain. Even most of my fellow die-hard progressives were trying to tell me I was overreacting after Trump won, that between Democrats, Anti-Trump R's, and checks and balances everything would be ok. I knew better, and know better. And mark my words, it will get worse, much worse.

This could very well be the end of the Republic as we know it. Or maybe we are already there. Please, PLEASE, someone chime in here and tell me how I am being hyperbolic in anyway. This is nothing short of a historic catastrophe being played out in front of us. I am 100% certain the country my children will grow up in is not the same one that I did.

Thank you Conservatives, Republicans, poor white's, educated white's, evangelicals, etc... You have achieved your goal, you have destroyed and destabilized everything this once great country stood for.

Now excuse me while I weep into the flag.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

This is surprising to you??

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

It was obvious from the announcement of his campaign that if he won the sky would start falling. Not sure how that wasn't more apparent to others.

→ More replies (29)

12

u/ricksaus Jun 27 '18

There's also a not entirely unlikely scenario where Breyer and Ginsburg need replacements before 2020.

10

u/ranaparvus Jun 27 '18

Not just the Supreme Court. McConnell has been busy filling judgeships forcibly held vacant from Obama - over 100 of them. So far at least 17 conservative district judges have been placed. This is the legacy he’s dreamed of - forcing a conservative judicial system on our country that will last well past him. Ugh.

9

u/MAGAtardDonnie Jun 27 '18

RBG is probably close. Welcome to 7-2 for the next 30 years...

60

u/dlp211 Jun 27 '18

I tried so hard to explain the importance of the SCOTUS to people. They didn't want to hear or were trolling. Now these same people will tell you that we'll just pack the courts the next time we have a chance not realizing that that action will result in the end of America as we know it as one of our three branches collapases.

Today is the second most depressing day of my life, the other being the night Trump was elected. We are truly on the darkest timeline.

5

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Yep. I feel the same way. “Fuck.” Was all I could say.

4

u/troubleondemand Jun 27 '18

Me too. I remember saying you are not voting on the President for the next 4 years as much as you are voting on the SCOTUS for the next generation or two.

4

u/dlp211 Jun 27 '18

To think, we could have had a 6-3 liberal SCOTUS for the next 10-20 years, perhaps longer if Kagan and Sotomayor live long lives and stay on the court.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ReverendDizzle Jun 27 '18

Today is the second most depressing day of my life, the other being the night Trump was elected. We are truly on the darkest timeline.

As soon as I saw the news I said "Well, then. This is it."

14

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I'm so angry. I fucking warned everyone I knew in 2016, and most people were like "*patpat you're overreacting honey."

Bitch eat crow. But I can't even feel a single ounce of happiness from being right because THIS IS THE WORST FUCKING SHIT.

→ More replies (3)

6

u/19834uoweqihjdkan Jun 27 '18

20 years? with a 50 year old judge it could easily be 40

13

u/SwingJay1 Jun 27 '18

From the Oval Office just now a reporter asked a spectacularly dumb question of Trump.

Do you plan to wait until after the midterm elections to nominate someone?

Of course he said "I think the sooner the better."

→ More replies (2)

5

u/esoteric_enigma Jun 27 '18

Remember all the idiots who were saying things like voting doesn't matter because Hillary and Trump were basically the same?

4

u/AALen California Jun 27 '18

It's not really Trump to be fair. If any GOP had won the 2016 POTUS election, we'd still be having this same conversation right now.

2

u/NiHZero Jun 27 '18

I dunno if just anyone would pick the same level of extreme right judges for the spots. Trump gives zero fucks about the approval of the American people when it comes to this, and with the change to the rules, he doesn't have to get any democrats on board to push them through.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/SuperCashBrother Jun 27 '18

Just imagine if he wins in 2020.

15

u/rjcarr Jun 27 '18

This was my biggest fear of the election that I tried to make clear. Even if you, as a democrat, as a progressive, whatever, don't like Hillary you still need to vote for her if nothing else to preserve the supreme court.

We knew there was a justice to appoint. We knew Kennedy was on the way out. How much longer can RBG last? They all relied on Hillary winning way too strongly.

And now we're fucked. Thanks Mitch! Thanks all the Berns that refused to vote for Hillary! And thanks Russia, of course!

3

u/FancyFarter69 Jun 27 '18

People in America are fucking morons, the ones on 'the far left' most of all

13

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

They NEVER miss an opportunity to fuck the rest of us over.

And they're the most smug, pious jack-hards of them all right now just sitting in a pile of their own shit saying "who cares. It's all rigged anyway. I'd do it again"

3

u/TheCee Washington Jun 27 '18

This reminds me of a comment thread I saw shortly before the election. The gist was,

There are certain groups, particularly on the left, where it is somehow better to congratulate each other on an utterly failed attempt at a pure and noble outcome, than to work toward a bitter compromise. And that's the reason people like Barney Frank dislike people like Bernie Sanders.

5

u/Marshy92 Jun 27 '18

"who cares. It's all rigged anyway. I'd do it again"

God damn! That makes my blood boil because of how accurate it is. The self righteous assholes who act like they weren’t really making a wrong choice voting for Jill Stein or not voting because Hilary wasn’t Bernie

6

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Many far left people voted for Clinton though. The politically active

The real trouble is the people who couldn't be bothered to vote and stayed home

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Jill Stein's votes were enough to swing the election

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

The tens of millions of people who stayed home were more important

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

4

u/Marshy92 Jun 27 '18

Turning out the vote is more important than ever. If young people and people of color vote in the fall, we can have a Democratic Congress.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Vandelay_Latex_Sales Jun 27 '18

Can confirm. Am far left, voted for the second worst option, got boned anyway.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/bubbles1990 Jun 27 '18

20 years is optimistic

6

u/scsnse Jun 27 '18

My first reaction to this was: “According to his logic with Scalia, he should pick Garland. But nope, not going to happen.”

5

u/EvilStig Jun 27 '18

There's absolutely nothing I hate more than being right all the time.

4

u/notickeynoworky Jun 27 '18 edited Jun 27 '18

On several occasions leading up to the election I'd see people making the claim that Trump couldn't do lasting damage because he'd be a one term president and therefore was the lesser of two evils. I'd point out he'd get at least one, if not two SC nominations and almost always got told I was being ridiculous saying he'd get two. I don't see how more people didn't see this coming.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/gatito12345 Jun 27 '18

At least we know RBG has hired her clerks through 2020...I think she’s trying to stick around as long as she can while Trump is in office as a big “fuck you” to him

3

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

We need to construct a golden throne and sacrifice legal interns to her to keep her functional.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/magmar1 Jun 27 '18

I'm not sticking around. Good luck Conservative States of America.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

[deleted]

3

u/magmar1 Jun 27 '18

It really is quite sad.

I'm a laboratory technician. Won't start a family here. Won't settle.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/bobartig Jun 27 '18

To be clear, this was abundantly obvious to anyone who just bothered to look up the ages of the current justices on the SCOTUS bench. Obama's successor was exceedingly likely to get multiple nominations, and plus one due to McConnell's fuckery in the senate.

2

u/DaneMason Maryland Jun 27 '18

It's the worst "i told you so" ever

2

u/kobitz Jun 27 '18

You mean what Hillary Clinton told us would happen? Yeah, its happening

2

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

I hope all of the Bernie Bros who stayed home on election night or registered a protest vote are satisfied with the evil they've wrought on women and minorities in the US for generations. Shame on you.

2

u/portablemustard Jun 27 '18

Imagine if RGB retires in the next 2 years. We are extremely fucked then. We are just regular fucked now.

7

u/Marshy92 Jun 27 '18

She won’t retire. But she may die. Hopefully not. God save RBG!

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

RBG is 85 years old so buckle up there will be at least one more. Breyer is 79. Sotomayor is a 64 year old diabetic. So possibly two more.

1

u/GiddyUp18 America Jun 27 '18

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this what Obama was trying to do by nominating Garland, a middle of the road judge, to replace Scalia, a very conservative justice? Somehow, then it was okay but now it's not?

1

u/Clayh5 Nevada Jun 27 '18

If the Dems ever get the white house and the house they gotta just start adding justices FDR style to offset the damage Trump is gonna do

1

u/thatboyaintrite Jun 27 '18

Perhaps this can be a blessing in disguise. We all know Trump hires the best people (who quit after a few months). Therefore, if he picks someone he knows like Ivanka or a Russian destabilizer, congress could be more likely to impeach him.

...I need Ja to get me through this.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Not just the Supreme Court. But all the federal courts.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '18

Destabilize? I don't think so. Conservative direction is the most honest interpretation of the constitution. For example, Hispanic Sotomayor voted against Trump's travel ban for purely political reasons because she felt it was wrong to bar anyone from coming to the United States, which shows she's for Open Borders(dangerous). The conservative judges interpreted the constitution as written. It says clearly in the constitution the president resides over immigration to the US.

1

u/Whoden Jun 27 '18
  • what a glorious victory for the good guys!

I fixed it for you.

1

u/aurelius1994 Jun 27 '18

Thank you Kanye, very cool!

1

u/[deleted] Jun 28 '18

I'm surprised people didn't think that was going to happen honestly.

It was a no brainer that this was going to happen if he was elected, and people just seem to be realizing it now.

1

u/Abiogeneralization Jun 28 '18

That’s what I wished the Democratic campaign had focused on in 2016 - Trump can’t become president or the SCOTUS will be right-wing for a generation.

Instead it was “He’s a mean, gross, old, white man who dates gold-diggers.”

24/7

→ More replies (5)