18 ms·
> According to her granddaughter Clara Spera, Ginsburg said, “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” https://
by adzm 6y ago
> According to her granddaughter Clara Spera, Ginsburg said, “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”
https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1307101417522561025 https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/13071014175225610...
- atonse 6y agoAs much as I respected and admired RBG, even she would’ve known it’s at best a wish and nothing else. If things weren’t so polarized, they absolutely should spare no time in replacing the seat, as is their duty. But we know it’ll be yet another cynical and dishonest process as it was last time.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tyingq 6y agoI'm somewhat curious how much deference and respect the administration will grant her. Basically how many days before they start pitching their nominee. Edit: Fwiw, the RBG movie about her is on Hulu now.
- bastardoperator 6y agoThey already pitched nominees because they knew she was dying. So zero respect. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/trump-supreme-court-picks-2020-election-biden https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/trump-suprem...
- tyingq 6y agoI suppose, but the number of days before they bring a nominee to the floor seems a more direct measure.
- basementcat 6y agoIt isn't about respect. The upcoming election may be disputed in court and the Administration wants to have as many judges on its side as possible. Even if there is no election related court challenge, there are many investigations of the current administration ongoing and it would be helpful to have more conservative justices for insurance.
- Aeolun 6y agoThe upcoming election will only be disputed by one side, because the other side will have such a clear majority that a dispute is practically impossible.
- yeetman21 6y agolol they are just being efficient, finally for once in government i might add. If you know a product is going to fail sometime in the near future, you will have teams working to make a replacement or a fix. No one is just going to leave that spot open forever
- _-david-_ 6y agoBoth sides have lists for judges not just for the supreme court but all federal courts. Its easier to keep a up to date list then to try to figure out a list when there is a vacancy. They will also often reveal the list or parts of it to get other people's opinions.
- LegitShady 6y agoYou know they dont respect her at all and they'll replace her as soon as feasible. This is a political win they can't ignore and people being offended won't change that in the least
- stjohnswarts 6y agoYou are completely right, I don't know why people are downvoting you.I predict they'll have someone nominated and approved and sitting on the seat within a month. All legistlation will be dropped until this matter is complete. No stimulus checks, no help for businesses, everything else just dropped to Ring2 and getting a new SCOTUS judge is in Ring 0
- LegitShady 6y ago> All legistlation will be dropped until this matter is complete. No stimulus checks, no help for businesses, everything else just dropped to Ring2 and getting a new SCOTUS judge is in Ring 0 All that stuff is held up in congress - they need the senate judiciary committee and the senate to approve a judge. That's it. People are downvoting because they're unhappy with the situation but my stating it gives them a target. But on the other hand, I'm not super worried about internet points. There's a possibility of a block of republicans who are anti trump (romney, collins, murkowski at least) might try to spike it, but McConnell has already said Trump's nominee will get a vote. I guess we'll see if they can cooperate enough to push it through. Grassley, Murkowski, Collins, and Graham have said they oppose a vote, but that might be lip service and there's a difference between "opposing a vote" and not voting. And pence gets a tie breaker if its a tie.
- tyingq 6y ago"romney, collins, murkowski" ... appreciate the hint. Researching that now. My humble apologies for HN blindly downvoting you. Is asked because I don't have a hard preconceived notion, and wanted replies like yours. Honest curiosity and debate is tricky business here.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- crowbahr 6y agoJust like Obama's nomination was blocked for more than a year to "let the voters decide"?
- atonse 6y agoSorry if I wasn’t clear. I found that disgusting and abhorrent, and a clear abdication of their duties.
- awalton 6y agoMcConnell says you never replace a Supreme Court Justice in an election year. Let's see just how long it takes him to release a public statement going back on that one...
- wilg 6y ago> Mr. McConnell and his allies say the two situations are different. Where one party controls the Senate and the other the presidency, as in 2016, they say, vacancies should not be filled in a presidential election year. Where the same party controls both the Senate and presidency, they argue, confirmations may proceed. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/us/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-dies-at-87.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/us/justice-ruth-bader-gin...
- spuz 6y agoIt's a terrible argument. If the senate is not controlled by the same party as the president and they dislike the president's choice for supreme court, they can vote not to confirm him/her. It also encourages the president to choose a nominee who can appeal to both parties. McConnell refused to allow Garland to even have hearings in the Senate let alone a vote because he feared that some of his republican colleagues may have been persuaded. If there are two controlling parties in two parts of the government then the solution is compromise. This is a philosophy totally abhorrent to McConnell whose views can only be supported by an authoritarian minority.
- someguydave 6y agoWait it takes two to compromise, and a Supreme Court pick is really important . What did the Democrats offer McConnell in exchange for Garland hearings?
- gamblor956 6y agoHe already has, in a talk at the Federalist Society last year, where he said that if given the chance to replace a SCOTUS justice in 2020 he would not hesitate. EDIT: And again, just over an hour ago, McConnell promised that he would have a vote on a new justice within a week of receiving the nomination. Meanwhile, Murkowski of Alaska announced she would not support confirmation hearings until after the election. And in other related news, Senate Democrats have promised to add seats to the Supreme Court if they win the Presidency and Senate in November and McConnell goes ahead with his plans... The next few months are going to be exciting.
- wilg 6y agoWhat do you mean "even she"? She literally said it was a wish!
- atonse 6y agoYep a wish. Like magic. I mean to say that even she knows that our constitution isn’t written for wishes. I say this as a completely dejected person knowing that the Republicans will fill that seat with another solidly conservative judge, not out of glee.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- SquishyPanda23 6y ago> even she would’ve known it’s at best a wish and nothing else. It's specifically her dying wish. IMO she's giving Senators who still support democracy something they can say to the press when they decline to vote to fill her seat.
- stagehn 6y agoThe daughter may be lying. We have no evidence that this was RBG's desire.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- blooalien 6y agoI wouldn't count on any politicians in our current government caring one little whit about that… :(
- charliemil4 6y ago[removed] It will be tough, but maybe they could
- monocasa 6y agoThey've already started. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/trump-supreme-court-picks-2020-election-biden https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/trump-suprem...
- wu_tang_chris 6y agoHe released the list back before Kavanaugh. He recently updated it.
- monocasa 6y agoYes... the article is about the new, updated list as of last week.
- miked85 6y agoTrump released a list before he was even elected.
- LegitShady 6y agoWhy would they wait for the things you think are more important that don't have anything to do with it? Republicans have a majority of the Senate judiciary committee and the Senate. They have it if they want it without involving stimulus or anything to do with Congress.
- alex_young 6y agoThere would seem to be precedent for this now. Justice Antonin Scalia died in February of 2016, a replacement was nominated in March of 2016, and because Scalia's seat had become vacant during an election year, the Senate would not even consider a nomination from the president [0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...
- HaloZero 6y agoMcConnell has already stated that he will put someone up even though his logic would apply to this year.
- minimaxir 6y agoIn a normal government, precedent would likely be followed. This is not a normal government.
- roenxi 6y agoThe precedent set was that the Senate can overrule the president. That precedent will be followed. I don't think anyone misunderstands the situation - McConnell is going to do whatever is most expedient to get a Supreme Court composition that he likes. Any specific justification is mostly cosmetic - Senate has the power, and the controller of the Senate uses the power.
- Hnrobert42 6y agoThat was not the precedent. The precedent was to “allow the country to decide.” Drop the pretext. His side won. Screw the other side. Just have some integrity and own it.
- thesagan 6y agoActually, I think this is now normal in the U.S. and should be expected going forward. From both duopoly parties. Power grabbing is the game.
- leftyted 6y agoNote that "until a new president is installed" means until 2024 if Trump is reelected.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- sky_rw 6y agoWell it's a good thing that she doesn't get a say in the matter.
- ed25519FUUU 6y agoCan you imagine a 4-4 Supreme Court deadlock in a Bush v Gore type situation?
- jgwil2 6y agoThen we would defer to the ruling of the lower court.
- int_19h 6y agoCan you imagine a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling, where the breaking vote comes from a judge appointed by the candidate whom the court declared the winner?
- Aeolun 6y agoGuess it’s back to civil war then.
- jimbob45 6y agoIn all the reading I’ve done on that case, it really seems like the biggest mistake the SCOTUS made was accepting the case in the first place.
- projektfu 6y agoWhy would you say that? They took the case to assure that outcome in my opinion.
- divbzero 6y agoAlso reported by NPR in the original post: Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”