RIP Ruth Bader Ginsburg

HughFreakingDillon said:

i know that it seems many seem to just automatically believe conservative judge = no more right to choose, but is that accurate? aren't there some conservative judges that believe it is a woman's right to choose?

Lerxst1992 said:

static111 said:

nicknyr15 said:

static111 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

darwinstheory said:

Bentleyspop said:

stuckinline said:

Obama's statement:
"Sixty years ago, Ruth Bader Ginsburg applied to be a Supreme Court clerk. She’d studied at two of our finest law schools and had ringing recommendations. But because she was a woman, she was rejected. Ten years later, she sent her first brief to the Supreme Court — which led it to strike down a state law based on gender discrimination for the first time. And then, for nearly three decades, as the second woman ever to sit on the highest court in the land, she was a warrior for gender equality — someone who believed that equal justice under law only had meaning if it applied to every single American.

Over a long career on both sides of the bench — as a relentless litigator and an incisive jurist — Justice Ginsburg helped us see that discrimination on the basis of sex isn’t about an abstract ideal of equality; that it doesn’t only harm women; that it has real consequences for all of us. It’s about who we are — and who we can be.

Justice Ginsburg inspired the generations who followed her, from the tiniest trick-or-treaters to law students burning the midnight oil to the most powerful leaders in the land. Michelle and I admired her greatly, we’re profoundly thankful for the legacy she left this country, and we offer our gratitude and our condolences to her children and grandchildren tonight.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought to the end, through her cancer, with unwavering faith in our democracy and its ideals. That’s how we remember her. But she also left instructions for how she wanted her legacy to be honored.

Four and a half years ago, when Republicans refused to hold a hearing or an up-or-down vote on Merrick Garland, they invented the principle that the Senate shouldn’t fill an open seat on the Supreme Court before a new president was sworn in.

A basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment. The rule of law, the legitimacy of our courts, the fundamental workings of our democracy all depend on that basic principle. As votes are already being cast in this election, Republican Senators are now called to apply that standard. The questions before the Court now and in the coming years — with decisions that will determine whether or not our economy is fair, our society is just, women are treated equally, our planet survives, and our democracy endures — are too consequential to future generations for courts to be filled through anything less than an unimpeachable process."

Once again he says and does the right thing.

Unfortunately, for America and Americans, the current regime and its supporters DO NOT CARE about the rule of law or the fundamental workings of our Democracy.

Hopefully at least 4 senators will do the right thing and nullify this effort to get another forced birther in the court.

Exactly! I miss a presidential president. Went to a small gathering last night surrounded by far right fucks. My girlfriend innocently (and yes, without much thought about her audience) said "Poor RBG, that was so sad to hear." The conversation hadn't been political prior to that and she clearly was not making a stance or starting any type of debate. Simply stating that it was sad to learn of the passing of RBG. The immediate response from the gun toting God & Kid Rock loving anti mask douche bags was:
A laughing feigned "awe, that's too bad" "did you hear the Supreme Court is now Ruthless" & "the dems are losing their minds now!" 

Dumb fucks!

This is why it’s important to be unemotional and steady. This is a problem for democratic politicians, leadership and every day Dems, who get too emotional and cry about things, and republicans  get off looking at how upset the liberals get. Pelosi and Schumer, who I both like, complain and whine endlessly in congress and on TV about how unfair the GOP is. Time to change your approach, Democrats.

until the Dems become measured and ruthless nothing will change. That is why it’s time for the Dems to start saying if there is nothing blocking it in the constitution (like court packing) we are doing it because the gop has continued to trash centuries old norms. Just ask Merrick Garland.

Republicans are talking about using the VP to break ties for Supreme Court nominations for the first time ever. What’s your move democrats?

Tearing up papers on tv 

Ha! 

Pelosi just said something like the only thing that she can do is make sure everybody votes. Uh this is happening in real-time and we need the people we voted for to take action before Election Day on this and of course the ongoing pandemic that we’ve all decided to forget due to RBGs passing.

Someone just said on the telly to slow down the senate and force R senators who need to raise money and campaign - they can do endless quorum calls until Election Day which forces them to physically be in the senate, then if Biden wins, they can impeach trump again after the election to tie up the senate during the lame duck until Jan 3 when the new congress gets sworn in. And this would also give them leverage if an impeached president tries to nominate someone after losing an election to pass a new law to pack the court (if the Dems win). It’s still very likely a 6-3 conservative court, goodbye Obamacare and womans right to choose

Lerxst1992 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

i know that it seems many seem to just automatically believe conservative judge = no more right to choose, but is that accurate? aren't there some conservative judges that believe it is a woman's right to choose?

They would probably make the restrictions and cost so great the women most likely who use this freedom, poorer/young minorities, the procedure would be out of reach for them.

A bigger concern is we can kiss goodbye Obamacare

static111 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

static111 said:

nicknyr15 said:

static111 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

darwinstheory said:

Bentleyspop said:

stuckinline said:

Obama's statement:
"Sixty years ago, Ruth Bader Ginsburg applied to be a Supreme Court clerk. She’d studied at two of our finest law schools and had ringing recommendations. But because she was a woman, she was rejected. Ten years later, she sent her first brief to the Supreme Court — which led it to strike down a state law based on gender discrimination for the first time. And then, for nearly three decades, as the second woman ever to sit on the highest court in the land, she was a warrior for gender equality — someone who believed that equal justice under law only had meaning if it applied to every single American.

Over a long career on both sides of the bench — as a relentless litigator and an incisive jurist — Justice Ginsburg helped us see that discrimination on the basis of sex isn’t about an abstract ideal of equality; that it doesn’t only harm women; that it has real consequences for all of us. It’s about who we are — and who we can be.

Justice Ginsburg inspired the generations who followed her, from the tiniest trick-or-treaters to law students burning the midnight oil to the most powerful leaders in the land. Michelle and I admired her greatly, we’re profoundly thankful for the legacy she left this country, and we offer our gratitude and our condolences to her children and grandchildren tonight.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought to the end, through her cancer, with unwavering faith in our democracy and its ideals. That’s how we remember her. But she also left instructions for how she wanted her legacy to be honored.

Four and a half years ago, when Republicans refused to hold a hearing or an up-or-down vote on Merrick Garland, they invented the principle that the Senate shouldn’t fill an open seat on the Supreme Court before a new president was sworn in.

A basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment. The rule of law, the legitimacy of our courts, the fundamental workings of our democracy all depend on that basic principle. As votes are already being cast in this election, Republican Senators are now called to apply that standard. The questions before the Court now and in the coming years — with decisions that will determine whether or not our economy is fair, our society is just, women are treated equally, our planet survives, and our democracy endures — are too consequential to future generations for courts to be filled through anything less than an unimpeachable process."

Once again he says and does the right thing.

Unfortunately, for America and Americans, the current regime and its supporters DO NOT CARE about the rule of law or the fundamental workings of our Democracy.

Hopefully at least 4 senators will do the right thing and nullify this effort to get another forced birther in the court.

Exactly! I miss a presidential president. Went to a small gathering last night surrounded by far right fucks. My girlfriend innocently (and yes, without much thought about her audience) said "Poor RBG, that was so sad to hear." The conversation hadn't been political prior to that and she clearly was not making a stance or starting any type of debate. Simply stating that it was sad to learn of the passing of RBG. The immediate response from the gun toting God & Kid Rock loving anti mask douche bags was:
A laughing feigned "awe, that's too bad" "did you hear the Supreme Court is now Ruthless" & "the dems are losing their minds now!" 

Dumb fucks!

This is why it’s important to be unemotional and steady. This is a problem for democratic politicians, leadership and every day Dems, who get too emotional and cry about things, and republicans  get off looking at how upset the liberals get. Pelosi and Schumer, who I both like, complain and whine endlessly in congress and on TV about how unfair the GOP is. Time to change your approach, Democrats.

until the Dems become measured and ruthless nothing will change. That is why it’s time for the Dems to start saying if there is nothing blocking it in the constitution (like court packing) we are doing it because the gop has continued to trash centuries old norms. Just ask Merrick Garland.

Republicans are talking about using the VP to break ties for Supreme Court nominations for the first time ever. What’s your move democrats?

Tearing up papers on tv 

Ha! 

Pelosi just said something like the only thing that she can do is make sure everybody votes. Uh this is happening in real-time and we need the people we voted for to take action before Election Day on this and of course the ongoing pandemic that we’ve all decided to forget due to RBGs passing.

Someone just said on the telly to slow down the senate and force R senators who need to raise money and campaign - they can do endless quorum calls until Election Day which forces them to physically be in the senate, then if Biden wins, they can impeach trump again after the election to tie up the senate during the lame duck until Jan 3 when the new congress gets sworn in. And this would also give them leverage if an impeached president tries to nominate someone after losing an election to pass a new law to pack the court (if the Dems win). It’s still very likely a 6-3 conservative court, goodbye Obamacare and womans right to choose

Couldn’t the senate just prioritize the Nomination over yet another impeachment?  Another impeachment seems like bad optics.

Lerxst1992 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

i know that it seems many seem to just automatically believe conservative judge = no more right to choose, but is that accurate? aren't there some conservative judges that believe it is a woman's right to choose?

They would probably make the restrictions and cost so great the women most likely who use this freedom, poorer/young minorities, the procedure would be out of reach for them.

A bigger concern is we can kiss goodbye Obamacare

Lerxst1992 said:

static111 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

static111 said:

nicknyr15 said:

static111 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

darwinstheory said:

Bentleyspop said:

stuckinline said:

Obama's statement:
"Sixty years ago, Ruth Bader Ginsburg applied to be a Supreme Court clerk. She’d studied at two of our finest law schools and had ringing recommendations. But because she was a woman, she was rejected. Ten years later, she sent her first brief to the Supreme Court — which led it to strike down a state law based on gender discrimination for the first time. And then, for nearly three decades, as the second woman ever to sit on the highest court in the land, she was a warrior for gender equality — someone who believed that equal justice under law only had meaning if it applied to every single American.

Over a long career on both sides of the bench — as a relentless litigator and an incisive jurist — Justice Ginsburg helped us see that discrimination on the basis of sex isn’t about an abstract ideal of equality; that it doesn’t only harm women; that it has real consequences for all of us. It’s about who we are — and who we can be.

Justice Ginsburg inspired the generations who followed her, from the tiniest trick-or-treaters to law students burning the midnight oil to the most powerful leaders in the land. Michelle and I admired her greatly, we’re profoundly thankful for the legacy she left this country, and we offer our gratitude and our condolences to her children and grandchildren tonight.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought to the end, through her cancer, with unwavering faith in our democracy and its ideals. That’s how we remember her. But she also left instructions for how she wanted her legacy to be honored.

Four and a half years ago, when Republicans refused to hold a hearing or an up-or-down vote on Merrick Garland, they invented the principle that the Senate shouldn’t fill an open seat on the Supreme Court before a new president was sworn in.

A basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment. The rule of law, the legitimacy of our courts, the fundamental workings of our democracy all depend on that basic principle. As votes are already being cast in this election, Republican Senators are now called to apply that standard. The questions before the Court now and in the coming years — with decisions that will determine whether or not our economy is fair, our society is just, women are treated equally, our planet survives, and our democracy endures — are too consequential to future generations for courts to be filled through anything less than an unimpeachable process."

Once again he says and does the right thing.

Unfortunately, for America and Americans, the current regime and its supporters DO NOT CARE about the rule of law or the fundamental workings of our Democracy.

Hopefully at least 4 senators will do the right thing and nullify this effort to get another forced birther in the court.

Exactly! I miss a presidential president. Went to a small gathering last night surrounded by far right fucks. My girlfriend innocently (and yes, without much thought about her audience) said "Poor RBG, that was so sad to hear." The conversation hadn't been political prior to that and she clearly was not making a stance or starting any type of debate. Simply stating that it was sad to learn of the passing of RBG. The immediate response from the gun toting God & Kid Rock loving anti mask douche bags was:
A laughing feigned "awe, that's too bad" "did you hear the Supreme Court is now Ruthless" & "the dems are losing their minds now!" 

Dumb fucks!

This is why it’s important to be unemotional and steady. This is a problem for democratic politicians, leadership and every day Dems, who get too emotional and cry about things, and republicans  get off looking at how upset the liberals get. Pelosi and Schumer, who I both like, complain and whine endlessly in congress and on TV about how unfair the GOP is. Time to change your approach, Democrats.

until the Dems become measured and ruthless nothing will change. That is why it’s time for the Dems to start saying if there is nothing blocking it in the constitution (like court packing) we are doing it because the gop has continued to trash centuries old norms. Just ask Merrick Garland.

Republicans are talking about using the VP to break ties for Supreme Court nominations for the first time ever. What’s your move democrats?

Tearing up papers on tv 

Ha! 

Pelosi just said something like the only thing that she can do is make sure everybody votes. Uh this is happening in real-time and we need the people we voted for to take action before Election Day on this and of course the ongoing pandemic that we’ve all decided to forget due to RBGs passing.

Someone just said on the telly to slow down the senate and force R senators who need to raise money and campaign - they can do endless quorum calls until Election Day which forces them to physically be in the senate, then if Biden wins, they can impeach trump again after the election to tie up the senate during the lame duck until Jan 3 when the new congress gets sworn in. And this would also give them leverage if an impeached president tries to nominate someone after losing an election to pass a new law to pack the court (if the Dems win). It’s still very likely a 6-3 conservative court, goodbye Obamacare and womans right to choose

Couldn’t the senate just prioritize the Nomination over yet another impeachment?  Another impeachment seems like bad optics.

I believe the senate must prioritize impeachment. The “optics” would only work if republicans  try to ram thru a judge after the election and trump lost and the senate flips to the Dems . It would violate McConnell’s new excuse that the voters in 2018 reaffirmed same party control of senate  and executive branch by now voting trump out in 2020. With many republican senators in blue/purple states in risk of getting voted out now, it’s likely McConnell holds off the confirmation  vote until the lame duck session.

I would think they should start by impeaching senators who lost their reelection and are trying to vote in a new judge. The optics would be the voters have spoken and we are impeaching you to respect the votes of your constituents. The goal is to simply tie up the senate for six weeks during the holidays so they can’t act, or have legal arguments in 2021 that McConnell took a dump on the constitution and the election  so Dems are exercising their constitutional right to add more justices to the high court. They could also continue quorum calls while multiple senators face impeachment. The goal is to slow it down and highlight mcconnell is disrespecting the results of the election.


its a long shot extreme but that’s the point. The gop continually lies about the constitution to bend it in their favor while Dems want proper optics. That’s probably why this court will remain conservative for 50 years

HughFreakingDillon said:

so weird this "lame duck session" in the US. in canada when you lose the election, that's the exact point you are out of a job. imagine getting fired and you're still doing your job for another 3 months. just bizarre. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

maybe he'll appoint himself so he can't be prosecuted. lol