• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Champion Of Gender Equality, Dies At 87

Status
Not open for further replies.
RBG was, of course, a terrible supreme court justice. First, if she didn't have such an ego, she would have retired during the Obama years, so he could have replaced her. Then, her ego couldn't allow her to retire during the Trump years, even though she was in terrible health and could not do the job. Then there was her jumping on the anti-Trump bandwagon publicly, even before he was inaugurated. Terrible precedence for a sitting supreme court justice to be so outwardly and vocally political. Add all of that to the fact that she was SO liberal that she could not see two sides of an issue. Most Supremes will occasionally surprise us by siding with the other side on some issues. RBG do none of that, she was an ideologue who saw the world as an us against them thing. Didn't she also defend full-term abortions?
 
Average nomination to conformation time is like 75 days. I'm not sure why you think a justice would have to be confirmed before the election; the current administration is in office for another 120+ days.

Because ramming through a nominee during a lame duck presidency would look even more brazenly hypocritical and opportunist than what they’re going to do.

They’re going to be brazenly hypocritical and opportunistic, they’re just going to choose the more politically expedient option.
 
RBG was, of course, a terrible supreme court justice. First, if she didn't have such an ego, she would have retired during the Obama years, so he could have replaced her. Then, her ego couldn't allow her to retire during the Trump years, even though she was in terrible health and could not do the job. Then there was her jumping on the anti-Trump bandwagon publicly, even before he was inaugurated. Terrible precedence for a sitting supreme court justice to be so outwardly and vocally political. Add all of that to the fact that she was SO liberal that she could not see two sides of an issue. Most Supremes will occasionally surprise us by siding with the other side on some issues. RBG do none of that, she was an ideologue who saw the world as an us against them thing. Didn't she also defend full-term abortions?

This forum has seen some lazy ass trolling but this really is another level of lazy.
 
Somewhere there's a list of how long its taken between seat vacated and when it was filled. 6 weeks seemed to be well within that range and certainly Jan 20th 2021 is plenty of time.

Trump will nominate a womanso democracts won't be able to use their stable of fake rape "victims" which should speed up the process.

Funny that's not what hypocritical Republicans said in 2016. McConnell, Graham and Trump along with all their scumbag supporters are ****ing hypocrites. And people wonder why I celebrate Trump supporters passing away.
 
Doesn't all this depend on who the new nominee is?

Maybe both sides will agree he/she is the right person?
 
Doesn't all this depend on who the new nominee is?

Maybe both sides will agree he/she is the right person?

Funny how Trump supporters are like "Wait and see", "maybe it will be good", when in 2016 they agreed that nominating someone from SCOTUS before an election was wrong and that the people should decide. Anyone who agreed with the actions in 2016 by Republicans and agree with the actions of Republicans in 2020 on this are ****ing worthless waste of air hypocrites and can burn in hell like they deserve.
 
Funny how Trump supporters are like "Wait and see", "maybe it will be good", when in 2016 they agreed that nominating someone from SCOTUS before an election was wrong and that the people should decide. Anyone who agreed with the actions in 2016 by Republicans and agree with the actions of Republicans in 2020 on this are ****ing worthless waste of air hypocrites and can burn in hell like they deserve.
F the GOP. RBG's death has completely energized the Democratic Base. The woman was loved by every single Democrat, from the Bernie Bros to the most Centrist Obama voter. There is no exception.

Trump and his Republican sycophants in the Senate are going to get trounced in November. It's obvious.
 
Because ramming through a nominee during a lame duck presidency would look even more brazenly hypocritical and opportunist than what they’re going to do.

They’re going to be brazenly hypocritical and opportunistic, they’re just going to choose the more politically expedient option.
Why? What is wrong with lame duck appointments? Of course it is hypocritical and politically expedient; it's the United States Congress!

Joe Biden argued in September 2016 to consider the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice. In September 2020 he argues the opposite. Absolutely hypocritical on both sides of the issue; no. one. cares.

Democrats should be pushing to get a nomination considered just as they were in 2016, and instead they are fighting it. No one stands on principles; it's all party over country. In this case Republicans just happen to be on the right side of history and Democrats on the wrong (assuming the senate will give a nominee full and appropriate vetting , of course)

The important and right thing to do is to consider a nominee if one is presented, in a timely manner to fill the slot and keep the court operating as normal. This was as true in 2016 as it is today.
 
Thank you for one of the best malaprops I've seen in a while.
In reflection, there is a massive difference between confirming before the election and confirmation before a new administration.
 
Boo hoo. Republicans are hypocrites but democrats aren't right? On the exact same topic. Nice try.


Funny that's not what hypocritical Republicans said in 2016. McConnell, Graham and Trump along with all their scumbag supporters are ****ing hypocrites. And people wonder why I celebrate Trump supporters passing away.
 
Boo hoo. Republicans are hypocrites but democrats aren't right? On the exact same topic. Nice try.

Please show where the Dems said you can't pick a SCOTUS pick during an election year and then did it. Glad you admit Trump supporters are hypocrites and a waste of air.
 
Boo hoo. Republicans are hypocrites but democrats aren't right? On the exact same topic. Nice try.
Don't think democrats are being hypocrites. Mcconnell set a precedent of not confirming judges election year and they now want him to stick with it. None of this would be an issue of merrick garland was not blocked for a year.
 
You're not paying attention. See what Biden, Schhumer etc said in 2016 vs what they're saying today.

Don't think democrats are being hypocrites. Mcconnell set a precedent of not confirming judges election year and they now want him to stick with it. None of this would be an issue of merrick garland was not blocked for a year.
 
You don't understand what hypocrisy is. I get now what the issue is.



Please show where the Dems said you can't pick a SCOTUS pick during an election year and then did it. Glad you admit Trump supporters are hypocrites and a waste of air.
 
If you liberals are saying that the democrats are NOT being hypocrites on this same issue then you're just ignorant and part of the problem. Educate yourself.
 
If you liberals are saying that the democrats are NOT being hypocrites on this same issue then you're just ignorant and part of the problem. Educate yourselves.
 
What about Jewish Law and
prompt burial.

One Day.
Maybe 2 if the sabbath is involved.


RBG should have been planted days ago.
What part do I have incorrect?


Moi
 
If you liberals are saying that the democrats are NOT being hypocrites on this same issue then you're just ignorant and part of the problem. Educate yourself.
They aren't. A precedent was set and gop is trying to renege on a precedent they set. Like I said if no precedent was set, there would be no arguments from democrats. Moscow mitch set the precedent that voters have to decide.
 
You don't understand what hypocrisy is. I get now what the issue is.

Hypocrisy is saying one thing is wrong and then doing it yourself. McConnell and Graham both said it was wrong to have a SCOTUS pick during an election year and they do it when they are offered the choice. It's ok, I'm aware Trump supporters are dumb as rocks and wastes of air. The best part about celebrating the passing away of Trump supporters is there is always some idiot Trump supporter passing away so the party is constant.
 
Follow the constitution. Both sides are hypocritical. Thats why the constitution exists.

What does the Constitution say about he number of Supreme Court Judges?

Answer: Nothing
 
How is this relevant to anything I said?



What does the Constitution say about he number of Supreme Court Judges?

Answer: Nothing
 
What does the Constitution say about he number of Supreme Court Judges?

Answer: Nothing

That is correct. The number has been changed by different presidents. This is all that the Constitution says about The Supreme Court.

Article III

Section 1

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section 2
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
 
RIP RBG. You were a pillar of stability in an American political environment full of turmoil, and you will be missed.
She was an enemy of the US Constitution. She was a Shard left wing partisan sitting on the Supreme Court.
 
There will not be enough defections to stop the nomination, of that I have little doubt. I wouldn't even count on these two, though McConnel will give them the room if they believe they need it.
There may be a Democrat or two seeking re-election who will vote to confirm a Trump nominee.
 
How is this relevant to anything I said?

it is relevant in the sense that you assume that the constitution text can resolve problems while in real life the problems are the result of people (or parties) making decisions about things that are not explicitly defined in the constitution. The same thing happened with the case of replacing Scalia when the GOP senators chose to withhold for almost a year a vote on Obama's nomination using as justification not what the constitution says (it said nothing about the time between having a president nominating a judge and the senate voting on such nomination ) but the idea that supposedly it is not right for any president and senate to appoint any judge close to elections, and that was almost nine months before the elections since Scalia died in mid February 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Scalia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom