4 ms·
> It seems highly likely that somewhere between now and January 2025, the following Justices will be replaced: > Conservative: Scalia Don't tease me. That woul
by byuu 12y ago
> It seems highly likely that somewhere between now and January 2025, the following Justices will be replaced:
> Conservative: Scalia
Don't tease me. That would literally make my decade. I wonder what Thomas would do without being able to blindly concur with everything Scalia says? He might actually have to start talking again during trials.
> it would take until sometime in the 2030s or 2040s before an overturned Citizens United could be reinstated.
One major issue is that the USSC can't just go back and reverse bad decisions (Citizens, Voting Rights Act) on day-one of a new 5-4 liberal majority. They'd have to get a case, stretch standing (again), and then explain why they were reversing course, which they're usually really against doing until a significant amount of time has passed.
But this is probably the only realistic option we have. We'll never see another constitutional amendment, let alone for something that would harm conservative election prospects.
- pliny 12y ago> I wonder what Thomas would do without being able to blindly concur with everything Scalia says? Are SCJs allowed to call a friend during deliberations?
- fnordfnordfnord 12y agoHe could flip a coin: Heads, Alito; Tails, Roberts. Or, he could watch Scalia's future show on Fox to learn what his opinion ought to be.
- aaronbrethorst 12y agoYeah, but they only get to use that lifeline once per deliberation. But, he'd still have 'ask the audience' and 'remove two' to fall back on.