Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

[BlueDemKev]

As you may or may not know, Justice Ginsburg is 80 years old and is not in the best of health. It is unlikely that she will be able to remain on the Supreme Court for too much longer.

If the Supreme Court does its dastardly deed of gutting the Affordable Care Act this week, confirming that it is nothing more than another branch of the legislative part of Congress (only far more powerful and dangerous), I believe that Justice Ginsburg should politely but assertively announce her immediate retirement from the bench the last day of the court's session this week, and publicly say that the court is no longer an indepedent institution, but a partisan political body with a conservative caucus and a liberal caucus and that she can no longer be a part of a sham judiciary.

This would allow President Obama to immediately nominate her replacement in early July, and Patrick Leahy should schedule hearings promptly while Harry Reid plans for an immediate vote by the full Senate in September using the nuclear option if necessary to get the new judge confirmed. The nominee must be liberal and YOUNG--as in under 50). We *cannot* afford to let the conservatives expand their majority on the Supreme Court, especially when we now know that Republican presidents will only nominate justices cut from the cloth of Alito, Scalia, and Thomas.

While I realize this would be a huge risk and we may pay a political price for doing this in the short term, we would still have at least four seats on the Supreme Court who will hopefully be able hang on until people kick out the Republicans again and a Democratic president can name their replacements.

This isn't about trying to be partisan...this is about saving our fucking country.

[Hoyt]

1. Another Republican appointee on the Supreme Court would be a catastrophe.

[freshwest]

2. +1

[Raster]

61. Catastrophe is an understatement. We may have the opportunity to break the 5-4 rethuglican lock...

...if President Obama is re-elected.

Not wanting to screw up my karma, and I sure don't want Agent Mike on my ass, however, Fat Tony is more than welcome to check out any time. Oh yeah, and his lapdog too!

[uponit7771]

78. +1

[former9thward]

3. The filibuster rule can't be changed until January.

[libinnyandia]

4. If the Republicans block any vote on a replacement it might hurt them at the polls.

[former9thward]

6. Maybe, it is hard to say.

Most Americans are not that informed about the SC and I don't think very many base their vote on it.

[rhett o rick]

67. They have already crossed that Rubicon. nm

[uponit7771]

79. No it wont, not with their cult members...they can burn baby bunny rabits on live TV

...and these dumb bastards would still vote for them.

The M$M is lopsided on reporting of kkkon fuck ups

[libinnyandia]

5. She should probably have retired sooner.

[BlueDemKev]

51. I agree.

Just for the purpose of keeping the seat liberal (much like Warren Burger by retiring in '86 which allowed Reagan to appoint another conservative to the seat, not knowing what the outcome of the 1988 election would be).

I wonder if Souter hadn't surprisingly retired in 2009, if Ginsburg would still be on the court. I think if, had Souter not retired, Stevens would have stepped down in '09 (instead of '10) which would have allowed Ginsburg to retire in either 2010 or 2011--plenty of time for Obama to have named a replacement for her.

[elleng]

7. Have you heard something about her health that I've missed?

If not,

[mopinko]

53. she is a tough bird.

i know her son, and i know what happens to people who cross her. it ain't pretty.
she'll be around for quite a while.

[elleng]

55. YES SHE IS!

GREAT that you know her son!

[mopinko]

76. i'm a little closer to her former daughter in law, which

is how i know how she is, if you get my drift.

[elleng]

77. Gotcha.

Sorry about whatever happened, but that's life, eh?

[mopinko]

81. one of those things.

interesting, tho.

[former9thward]

56. She has pancreatic cancer.

And she earlier had colon cancer. What the current status of her treatment is unclear. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29036143/ns/us_news-life/t/ginsburg-has-surgery-pancreatic-cancer/

[elleng]

59. Did you notice the date on the linked article?

2/5/2009!!!

'had surgery Thursday after being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, the court said.

The cancer was apparently in the early stages, according to the court announcement.'

I think it is fair to assume that her pancreatic cancer is no longer active, if it exists at all any longer. I suspect it is not accurate to post now 'She has pancreatic cancer.'

[former9thward]

60. Yes I noticed the date.

And I could not find any recent status of her medical treatment so I said that was unclear. I am not her doctor and you are not either. I am familiar with that cancer and most doctors will never say "You no longer have this cancer". They may say it is in remission. If the cancer is "inactive" she still has it. If you know of a link where it is no longer in existence please provide it.

[elleng]

63. I am not aware of anything more recent, which is why I asked the question.

We've also seen and heard her; she's working hard.

None of us can say she is 'cancer-free,' obviously.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. No. She should wait until after the election.

Then, a truly liberal appointee (if Obama could break out of his centrist mode for a moment) would have a better chance of getting through the senate.

[demwing]

9. Her replacement is far more important

than the Presidential election, are you so 100% positive that Obama will be re-elected that you would risk a Romney appointment?

[Auntie Bush]

13. I can't think of any thing worse for our country than Romney as President and picking a

Tea Party candidate to the SC. It would be the death of this country as we know it. It's so sickening I can't stand the thoughts of the possibility. Can you just imagine............................? The next president will probably get to pick 3 SCJ's. I pray for Obama and out country.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. Yes. I am 100% sure of an Obama victory.

And, therefore, I see no risk of a Romney appointment. I do, however, see a risk of Obama appointing another moderate to the court to avoid a conflict.

[demwing]

57. Well please don't take this as an insult, but you are not being realistic

or showing the pragmatism for which Obama is famous.

I believe he'll be re-elected, but I believed Gore would be President as well. There was no doubt in my mind.

Shit happens, friend.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

66. Well, I'm 100% sure that Obama won't seeking my, or your, opinion on the matter.

[demwing]

71. Actually, Obama says "Hey..."

"Thank you...for the support." and "Maybe '98% sure' would sound more reasonable."

His words, not mine.

[n2doc]

26. Who is to say the senate will remain in Dem hands? n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. Who is to say it won't?

"There is no safety in the cosmos." Alan Watts

[wordpix]

69. you are assuming O will win, but the repukes with their Citizens United Crossroads GPS Kocheads

billion$ could steal it by legalized bribery.

[demwing]

10. Ginsburg Cracks Wise

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/06/ginsburg-predicts-sharp-disagreement-ahead-of-supreme-courts-high-profile-cases.php

"Ginsburg cracked a joke about the health care case and the individual mandate. “If the individual mandate, requiring the purchase of insurance or the payment of a penalty, if that is unconstitutional, must the entire act fall?” she said, then offering up the alternative to throwing out the whole law because of the mandate. “Or, may the mandate be chopped, like a head of broccoli, from the rest of the act?”

Would Ginsburg joke this way if either path had been decided? With the court's tight secrecy policy, I doubt it. I think Ginsburg was engaged in some wishful thinking...

I'm calling it in favor of the law, with a conservative majority ruling.

[Tx4obama]

11. See comment #38 on the LINK below

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002275161#post38

[elleng]

18. Yes Tx4. Thanks.

'Although some have speculated she might step down next year, the 77-year-old Ginsburg told The Associated Press on Tuesday she has no plans to retire anytime soon and still wants to match Justice Louis Brandeis, who stepped down at age 82.'

[AJTheMan]

12. John Paul Stevens served until he was 90. Don't give up on Ginsburg so soon. nt

[elleng]

15. No reason WHATSOEVER.

[robinlynne]

27. Cool! hadn't looked at it that way.

[SunSeeker]

48. Stevens didn't have pancreatic cancer.

They did find her pancreatic cancer when the tumor was still small, but that kind of cancer comes back, even when caught early.

[BlueDemKev]

52. Stevens had prostate cancer, I believe

...but they found it early, Thank God.

[SunSeeker]

58. Early prostate cancer has a 90%+ survival rate. Early pancreatic cancer...not so much.

I love Ginsburg, but as soon as she was diagnosed, she should have retired. And mind you, this is not her first cancer. The reason they caught the pancreatic cancer as early as they did was because they were giving her a CT scan to check for recurrance of a prior cancer, I think it was colon cancer. That was over a year ago as I recall. My mom died of pancreatic cancer. There's simply no effective treatment/chemo for pancreatic cancer like there is for prostate cancer. Indeed, men can live with slow-growing prostate cancer for a decade or more without any treatment. Only a small percentage of people make it past 2 years after a pancreatic cancer diagnosis. When Ginsburg's pancreatic cancer recurs, and it almost surely will, it will take her fast (a matter of months). If Obama is not in the White House when that happens, our country will get another young, off-the-charts conservative fascist to fill her seat. Good bye right to choose, good bye democracy...

However, it looks like she's made up her mind to stay on. So all I can do is hope she is in that lucky few percent that makes it.

[sadbear]

17. Really?

Was I wrong to think that his two appointments have consistently sided with Ginsberg and Breyer and against the four horsemen?

[elleng]

20. Not 'really' I think, sad.

Something wrong with that one.

[Tx4obama]

21. No you're not wrong. Obama's two LIBERAL appointments having been doing just fine. n/t

[Pab Sungenis]

25. So far.

But look at Sotomayor's record. She's another "moderate" (read: conservative) and there are going to be times - vital times - when she's going to defect. She voted with the Republicans against unions levying emergency dues for political purposes, for example.

And as for Kagan? "There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage."

[geek tragedy]

31. Sotomayor does not have a conservative record.

And stating that the federal constitution does not guarantee same-sex marriage does not make someone antigay, let alone deserving of your hate speech here.

[Pab Sungenis]

39. "There is no Federal constitutional right to an abortion."

Would you tolerate that remark from a Democratic nominee?

If not, then don't demand that I tolerate Kagan's remark.

[elleng]

44. Who said this? When?

Before or after Roe?

[LiberalAndProud]

41. Your complaint may be legitimate.

Obama might nominate another moderate to the court. Moderates are a far cry better than radical right wingers we'll get under Romney. We don't have ideal choices in this election. Even so, there is a stark contrast.

[dsc]

43. that is rather misleading

There were two issues in the case at hand. One was whether the union had followed proper procedures for an opt out system (Sotomayor and Breyer said it hadn't) and the other was whether opt out or opt in was the proper procedure she joined all the liberals for stating that opt out was the proper procedure.

[elleng]

64. Thanks. Good to mention the issues.

[geek tragedy]

28. No, that one is just a troll. People who object to homophobia

don't use slurs like 'harpie' which is a sexist term.

[Pab Sungenis]

34. That's the least offensive thing I could call her.

What about "bigot?" Or "homophobe?" Do you and the word police have a problem with either of those?

[Pab Sungenis]

40. Ah. Code word here. "Misogyny."

Read: "No woman, ever, may ever be criticized by a man."

There will be no reasoning with you. Good bye. Have a nice day.

plonk

[geek tragedy]

23. Antigay harpie? Double points for sexism on top of a blatant lie.

In the real world, Sotomayor and Kagan are left of center jurists who favor GLBTQ rights.

[Pab Sungenis]

30. Actual Kagan quote:

"There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage."

Any nominee who would say "there is no Federal constitutional right to an abortion" would have had her nomination yanked before the echo from the speakers in the hearing room had ended. But it's de riguere for Democratic nominees to be anti-gay it seems.

[geek tragedy]

37. Spare us your dishonest smears. Kagan is not antigay

because she holds the view that virtually every jurist on the SCOTUS--from John to Thurgood Marshall--has had.

[treestar]

80. Maybe she just doesn't think the constitution contains it

That doesn't mean she is against it.

The Founders were not really thinking about these issues. The case law so far may not support it. That doesn't mean she's against it or even against that holding.

[bvar22]

83. The REALLY maddening part of this is that Kagan, a "Centrist/Moderate"...

...replaced John Paul Stevens, a Pro-Working Class/Pro-Consumer Rights/Pro-Civil Liberties Liberal,
thus swinging the Supreme Court way to The Right,
....under a Democratic Administration!





You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[robinlynne]

29. The supreme court is the reason most of us will vote for Obama. really the one reason.

[Pab Sungenis]

32. That's sad.

No matter who wins the Presidency, a conservative will be nominated to fill the next vacancy.

If you don't have another reason to vote for Obama (and really there are many) then we have a real problem.

[robinlynne]

35. Yes we have a real problem.

[Tx4obama]

19. Her health problems are under control and she looked great the other day

saw her on C-Span giving a short speech and she looked better than ever.

[elleng]

22. Looked and sounded great,

more than a 'short speech,' imo, and with abundant humor.

[robinlynne]

24. I agree. I would imagine everything is ready for that to happen. I dont know about this week, but I

know she is caring and intelligent and is not giving her seat to a right winger.

[Tx4obama]

36. Ginsburg is not ready to retire.

Ginsburg doesn't want to retire until she beats Justice Louis Brandeis' length of time on the SC bench.

See comment #38 on the LINK below

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002275161#post38

[robinlynne]

45. Yes, I saw, after I posted.

[Raine]

42. 80 is not that old in this day, don't have her retired before her time or even worse dead,

geeesh

[wordpix]

70. not that old but having cancer, yes it's old

Don't kid yourself.

My dear friend was 80 with cancer for several years and was a good fighter but succumbed at 82. She just could not continue with operations and chemo at that age.

[jaysunb]

46. I whole heartedly agree....

even though it's a bold, brazen, political calculation, it may be the only way to save this country from itself.

[mmonk]

47. I say no.

Besides, anyone remember the gang of 13? They essentially assured this Citizens United abomination of a court. A liberal won't be appointed in an election year.

[BlueDemKev]

49. The "Gang of 14" determined that filibusters...

...would NOT be used except in "extraordinary circumstances." If we can't get 50 of the 53 Democrats currently in the Senate to vote to confirm President Obama's nominee, then frankly, we don't deserve to keep control of the Senate.

[mmonk]

50. Wait to November but before they adjourn..

I don't trust Senate Democrats through experience.

[Tx4obama]

72. It takes 60 votes in the Senate for cloture

The republicans have been filibustering almost all of the nominees, so it takes 60 'yes' votes for cloture before there can be a full vote on the Senate floor.

[OmahaBlueDog]

54. She should have retired sooner. I suspect Scalia talked her into staying

Strange but true: The Scalias and the Bader-Ginsburgs are tight. They vacation together as couples and are very close socially.

If she retires now, Obama will not be able to replace her. Any nominee will be blocked on the grounds that "it's an issue that should be decided after the election."

Make no mistake -- Obama's re-election probably charts the future course of the court for the next 20 years. He'd very likely get to replace Scalia & Bader-Ginsburg, and possibly get to replace Breyer and C. Thomas.

[demwing]

73. I thought maybe Fat Tony

Luca Brasi visit her one night...made her an offer she couldn't refuse

[SunSeeker]

75. How can she stand to be around that windbag?

I've heard about Ginsburg's friendship with Scalia before, and it never made sense to me. I have a guy at work who is just like Scalia. I would rather slit my wrists than spend my free time around him. But my work troll is innocuous. Scalia on the other hand has the power of the right wing Court majority. He can and has harmed the lives of Americans with his views. How can she sip wine with the guy who was in the majority in Bush v. Gore and Citizens United? Scalia's a traitor to America and an enemy of democracy. Knowing what he did to America, I can't even stand to look at his face. I don't know how she can. It makes me wonder about her.

[Hippo_Tron]

65. Supreme Court justices don't get appointed in presidential election years

No, the constitution doesn't forbid it, and yes technically it could be done. But it's pretty standard precedent that on the eve of a presidential election, you wait for the people to speak before filling such a vacancy.

[WI_DEM]

68. Actually quite a few were appointed in a presidential election year

Salmon P. Chase
Morrison Waite
Lucius Lamar
Melville Fuller
George Shiras, Jr.
Rufus Peckham
Mahlon Pitney
Louis Brandeis
John Clarke
Benjamin Cardoza
Frank Murphy
William Brennan, Jr
Lewis Powell
William Renquist

and these were just since 1864 there might be some from earlier.

[Tx4obama]

74. How many of those were replacing someone that died?

How many were replacing someone that retired?

[bvar22]

82. President Obama does not have a record of nominating "Liberals".

If the pattern holds, he will nominate someone to the Right of Ginsberg,
an acceptable "moderate",
making the Supreme Court even more conservative overall.

Replacing Liberal JP Stevens with "moderate" Elena Kagan was a kick in the guts for anyone to the Left of Reagan.