[biker1]

According to that logic then many Supreme Court judges should retire now or should have retired already based solely on the status of the Senate and White House as many are elderly. I am pretty sure nobody cares about whether anyone else's memory of RBG is tarnished. She served with great distinction and by all accounts led a great and productive life. That is the untarnished memory I will have of her (if anyone cares).

Originally Posted by ithos

However, if a new conservative appointment to the Supreme Court is successful, her memory will be tarnished for many of her erstwhile admirers. She put her personal ambition ahead of the interest of the leftwing of the this country by not retiring under the President Obama's administration when her health was in serious decline.

[DecaturFargo]

Just plain disrespectful.

[Dahabs]

Originally Posted by oneclickplus

I think it will happen ... and fast. With the divisiveness in this country, and so many issues headed to the supremes, I think he will nominate and will get approved fast. Republicans still control the senate. Regardless of what Kavanaugh went through, they could do this in a day or two. Unprecedented? yes. Impossible? no.

Far from a done deal. I can think of a few senators that would revisit the Kavanaugh appointment if given half a chance. Add to that the logic used for not appointing Obama's nominee in 2016. I can think of two or three senators that might be willing to block any nomination at this time.

[noslices1]

Do you remember how contentious the Democrats were during the hearings for justice Cavanaugh? Well, you ain’t seen nothing yet!

Can’t wait for the voters to see who they are voting for. Let the games begin.

[Veiragirl]

Originally Posted by alwann

No warning? She was fighting a losing battle with cancer for years. Will not be surprised if the president nominates someone by Monday. It was reported last week, he was already reviewing potential nominees, which might mean insiders knew she was dying.

That doesn't surprise me. Considering what an empathic and humble person he is.

[oneclickplus]

Originally Posted by noslices1

I think we will have a nomination on Monday. President Trump was initially elected on the grounds that he will get Constitutional conservative Justices appointed to the Supreme Court and he has 112 days to get his third Justice appointed. It WILL happen.

You think he will wait until Monday? No time like the present. Git'er done!!

[tvbound]

I'm betting that we will quickly see, in real actions, the true definition of the words shamelessness and hypocrisy. Then again, what's new?

RIP Notorious RBG - you are a true American hero.

[donassaid]

I would hardly put her in the same sentence as Jesus, given her stance and rulings on abortion. She should have retired years ago but stubbornly held on, hoping to survive until after the election. There should be a mandatory retirement age for Supreme Court Justices, certainly not past tge age of 85 and, preferably, 75 or 80.

[vilger]

Unless the presidential election is a complete blowout by one side or the other, it will most likely be litigated in the Supreme Court. So it is very important that a new Supreme Court justice is confirmed before November 3 - someone who is easily pliable with no backbone would do nicely; I'm thinking that Ted "your father killed JFK, and your wife's reflection cracks mirrors" Cruz would fit the bill.

[ithos]

Originally Posted by biker1

According to that logic then many Supreme Court judges should retire now or should have retired already based solely on the status of the Senate and White House as many are elderly. I am pretty sure nobody cares about whether anyone else's memory of RBG is tarnished. She served with great distinction and by all accounts led a great and productive life. That is the untarnished memory I will have of her (if anyone cares).

There were many calls for her to resign by Democrats under the Obama administration.
Why Justices Ginsburg and Breyer should retire immediately. | The New Republic

Ruth Bader Ginsburg should do all liberals a favor and retire now | Michael Cohen | Opinion | The Guardian

U.S. Justice Ginsburg hits back at liberals who want her to retire | Reuters

And there are many more such articles.

Now, many conservatives are glad that she didn't. If the Supreme Court takes a right turn, then I am confident that this prediction will come to fruition.

[donassaid]

But Democrats were incensed and threw a fit for years about Merrick Garland, insisting that a sitting President had that right. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, suddenky it would be wrong and immoral. Such hypocrisy.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by noslices1

McConnell didn’t put through Merrick Garland’s nomination, because the majority in the Senate was Republican with a Democrat President making the nomination. With a Republican President and a Republican Senate it will happen. The rule only applies when the parties are different.

That is simply, and only a statement of McCconnell when needed...nothing more.

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by donassaid

But Democrats were incensed and threw a fit for years about Merrick Garland, insisting that a sitting President had that right. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, suddenky it would be wsrong and immoral. Such hypocrisy.

It was ONE year, and for me, it was another embarrassment for our nation.

To disengage from our principles and constitutional meaning by inventing a rule on the fly is unamaerican, at best.

I was still a GOP activist at the time and was and still am embarrassed by the entire situation.

[jbrown132]

Originally Posted by Bucco

"Senate Republicans have promised to try to fill the vacancy even in the waning days of his first term. The confirmation battle, in the middle of a pandemic and a presidential election, is sure to be titanic."

"In 2016, Senate Republicans refused to consider President Barack Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick B. Garland, saying that holding hearings in the last year of a president’s term would deprive voters of a role in the process."

----------------------

"With the election less than two month away, McConnell said the Senate would act to fill the vacancy, even though he spent most of 2016 denying a confirmation hearing to President Barack Obama’s pick to fill a vacancy on the high court."

McConnell Vows Quick Vote on Trump Pick to Fill Ginsburg Seat

Remember, McConnell has always said that when you have a President of one party and the Senate controlled by the other party then the voters should participate in that decision. However, if the President and the Senate are of the same party then the voters have already made that decision. Regarding RGB I admired her and her tenacity but lost some respect for her when she let her political bias show through which a Supreme Court Justice should never do. Great Justices will many times write opinions contrary to their personal biases as they understand their job is to interpret the law and constitution as written and not make the law. The late great Antonin Scalia use to say that it is the job of a justice to interpret the law but when seven unelected justices start making the law then it is not much of a democracy.

[golden]

Ginsburg's legacy will be the first Supreme Court Justice to openly politicize the Court.
Sandra Day O'Connor was the first female Justice, Ginsburg the second. O'Connor retired from the court in grace at age 76, she is now 90. Ginsburg had to be carried out. Ginsburg rolled the political dice and lost.