I heard the same shit when I said Trump was owned by Putin and his entire team was working with him in June 2016. You're clueless. The GOP doesn't want anything to happen that might negatively affect them, and they know playing dirty works. Why not just call off an election? Will people actually riot over it? They certainly don't think so.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rumors of Justice Kennedy's Impending Retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court
- Thread starter TangoAlphaLima
- Start date
- Status
I heard the same shit when I said Trump was owned by Putin and his entire team was working with him in June 2016. You're clueless. The GOP doesn't want anything to happen that might negatively affect them, and they know playing dirty works. Why not just call off an election? Will people actually riot over it? They certainly don't think so.
I H8 Memes
Member
Ginsburg is 84 and Breyer is 78 too.
elrechazado
Banned
Who said they aren't going to control the court? I feel like you're not really reading the comments in order or meaning to reply to someone else? Removing the legislative filibuster is a completely different issue than introducing a bill to pack the court, all of which is completely different from an ideological shift in the existing court.
No. I really hope thats not the case. Kennedy although he was appointed by Republican President Regan, Kennedy tended to be socially liberal.
Ever since election night I've been hoping the Supreme Court stays the same for the 4 years.
If the current Supreme Court stays the same for the remainder of Trump's term. And if a Democrat wins in 2020, we have a chance to not be completely f-ed over for a generation or more. Though I'd be lying if I didn't say some of the ages of the liberal Supreme Court Justices concern me/
If Trump gets to add more Supreme Court Justices it could be devastating politically for DECADES.
That's what I was thinking.
With the type of cases they have coming up I wouldn't have expected it this soon.
Ever since election night I've been hoping the Supreme Court stays the same for the 4 years.
If the current Supreme Court stays the same for the remainder of Trump's term. And if a Democrat wins in 2020, we have a chance to not be completely f-ed over for a generation or more. Though I'd be lying if I didn't say some of the ages of the liberal Supreme Court Justices concern me/
If Trump gets to add more Supreme Court Justices it could be devastating politically for DECADES.
That's what I was thinking.
With the type of cases they have coming up I wouldn't have expected it this soon.
elrechazado
Banned
Obama's going to hand over the US to the mooslims and take our guns. That's as likely to happen as your crazy scenario. When we have midterm elections with zero Trump military coup or whatever you are positing, are you willing to admit that this was absolute nonsense, or will you just pretend you never said this?
Psychoward
Banned
Huh?
I responded to the bolded saying that won't even be a thing until 2018 and even that's a maybe. They already got Gorsuch through and who knows who else is gonna die or retire by the time the dems get the court back.
Autodidact
Banned
Jeff Sessions be like, "I don't recall~~~"
Escape Goat
Member
The sky is falling.
elrechazado
Banned
Indeed, my mistake .
I think you are being too technical in your response.
I am aware that the RS have yet to end the legislative filibuster and that packing the court by adding justices are two different things.
My point is the Rs have ended the filibuster for SC nominees and pulled their Garland shit. And purged voters. And suppressed the vote. And held endless Benjamin ghazi hearings to harm Hillary.
Do not assume anything is a bridge too far for them. It's become about their conservative ideology winning at all costs. If they reach a point where they want to pass a bill that can't go through reconciliation process they'll end the legislative FB.
They have not packed the courts or ended the legislative FB only because they have not needed to yet. If they reach a point where these things are the only obstacle they will remove them.
They entered endless campaigning all-out-war mode during the Obama administration. They aren't going to shy away from anything to push their agenda.
excelsiorlef
Member
Sure I do.
But two of the biggest were purely because of Kennedy : Casey and Obergefell
Also Roberts sides with social conservatives far more than Kennedy does.
Obergefell is probably safe but without Kennedy Roe v Wade is in trouble, lose RBG and it's basically guaranteed dead.
And we're talking judges getting nominated from this President and this Republican party, the days of O'Connor likes are gone
I said they'll try. I look forward to you eating a shit ton of crow when a "terrorist attack" or some HoC only dumber level shit happens.
I mean I don't think roberts would ever directly overturn roe or casey
there are ways to hurt those holdings a lot, i.e. death by a thousand cuts, through procedural means or limited holdings on specific challenges to state anti-abortion laws
and I think, under a more conservative court, that you're right. casey is going to get weakened.
but you know what? casey has been under attack since its inception. red states do everything they can to limit abortion as is. so what really changes?
I think, if the roberts court goes as far as to directly overturn casey, we will see the liberal vote come out with the fury of the abrahamic god, akin to the rise of the tea party/midterms after ACA
and I welcome that. let's fight our battles at the ballot box. let's fucking win. they'll get the court, or at least I've accepted it after november was lost. but we can take back congress/executive. we need to put in the same grit that led to the rise of the religious right, and zealously pursue our issues at the ballot box; 50 state style.
They might have to.
But yes, it will mean every time the other party gets power back they'll want to pack the court with two more justices to swing it the other way. We would go from 11 to 13 to 15 etc. It's definitely a risk.
Considering we have literally seen GOP plans for the 18 elections and how they plan to run it, saying there going to try to call it off is actually the stupidest angle you could possibly bet on
Autodidact
Banned
You very correctly say "who knows?" about Kennedy's retirement or other justices' death or retirement. I agree. Only a justice knows when he or she would resign, and only the universe knows when someone will die a la Scalia. The current nine justices could easily perish in a bus crash on the way to the annual Six Flags retreat. Who knows?
However, I try not waste time worrying about things that may or may not happen. My beautiful mind can't handle that much stress. Instead, I try to plan and prepare for events that I KNOW - not just think - will be important evens. There WILL be midterm elections, despite what some Cassandras with broken Magic 8 balls say in this thread. Democrats WILL have a chance, albeit small, to reclaim the Senate. That chance CAN be bolstered by voters' active participation in democracy. A Democratic Senate WILL reject or force Trump to moderate his picks. These events will happen, so I dedicate my energies to them.
Now, if Kennedy retires, I'll reevaluate, but until then, I'll focus on more certain matters.
elrechazado
Banned
Same comments again. you find any elected representative or government official that even proposes canceling the elections. You won't, but that won't stop you from your Infowarsesque theorizing.
That's what they want you to think. Wake up.
excelsiorlef
Member
Well gee great I'm glad you welcome women losing bodily autonomy to motivate voters...
And it won't matter because if Roe v Wade go all the Democratic control in the country isn't going to bring it back under the court that killed it.
Chezzymann
Member
Just wait until the midterms please so dems can have a chance to block nominees for 2 years like the republicans did
I don't trust Roberts one bit on Obergefell, particularly due to his radical dissent:
"If you are among the many Americans -- of whatever sexual orientation -- who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today's decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it."
With a court of Roberts and four Scalia clones, we can't really take anything for granted.
Precisely my point. The argument against Garland was he wasn't a fair replacement for Scalia. You think Kennedy is going to get replaced with a swing vote? That 'logic' they used against Obama will be gone. They are going to cram the court with extreme right wing SC nominees. Voting rights are cooked. They don't care if they represent the country. They want control and they're going to get it.
I just hope the blowback isn't as extreme as it could be. This could become a situation where a party that does not represent the majority of Americans figures ways to retain power through voter suppression tactics. Get ready for early voting to end in some states.
Get ready for direct election of Senators to be on the chopping block. It'll be hard to pull off, but it's one of the few elections they can't gerrymander outright. It's why so many of their presidential nominees want it gone. Statewide elections are harder to tip the scales in your favor for.
Certain states already do everything they can to take away abortion rights, and it takes months or years for the challenges to get appealed up.
I really don't think casey/roe getting overturned, even if it happened, would be the seismic shift that you're painting it as.
Red legislatures already act like it doesn't exist, and dare the court to shoot them down. Sure, the court does, but has that stopped them from taking advantage of the drawn out appellate process? Will it ever stop them? Maybe it's time for us to be galvanized and focused about the real root of the problem: federal and state level legislative branches.
Why cancel elections when you can just remove the consequences for losing? See North Carolina and their blatant attempts to strip all power from the governor. This is actually the biggest consequence of a conservative Supreme Court: all the states will be free to run amok, and there is no doubt they will use that freedom to suppress minorities on a scale not seen in decades.
elrechazado
Banned
If they could pack the court today, as many have pointed out they could if they want, they would. I think we both agree they haven't because of some reasons not to. I'll be happy to eat my hat if they in fact, do. Its clear so far that they are smart enough to not take this step.
Edit your post and remove the Infowars shit. Call me a conspiracy theoriest if you want. I think the Republicans are capable of anything and you might find that outrageous, but I'm not a Sandy Hook truther trying to make money off of dead children.
The time to freak out about Garland, Kennedy, and the elder liberals on the court was last year, but hardly anyone wanted to hear it. The next time anything can be done is in November 2018, when a Dem majority senate could prevent any new appointees until after 2020.
It would be disastrous if Kennedy or anyone else leaves the court before then, but there's literally nothing that can be done right now.
It would be disastrous if Kennedy or anyone else leaves the court before then, but there's literally nothing that can be done right now.
elrechazado
Banned
No. You literally claimed they would stage fake terror attacks and cancel democracy. That's Infowars caliber Loose Change level theorizing.
Assuming dems can retake the senate in 2018 is a pretty big assumption. Likely they'll do well, but the map for midterms is pretty fucking bleak, as far as the senate is concerned.
To get a majority (51 seats), they have to hold onto every single seat, including seats in Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia, as well as win 3 seats, two of which will have to be from deeply red states.
Shit is going to be a Hail Mary, which is even more the reason to need to get out and get desperate.
To get a majority (51 seats), they have to hold onto every single seat, including seats in Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia, as well as win 3 seats, two of which will have to be from deeply red states.
Shit is going to be a Hail Mary, which is even more the reason to need to get out and get desperate.
Earthbound64
Banned
The guy's 80.
Any day could be the day he dies.
Sure, the same is true of anyone.
But, at age 80, one's chances are significantly higher.
smokeandmirrors
Banned
If trump gets another pick and dems don't do anything or pack the court.....
Jeremy Corbyns communist hell hole in the UK sounds quite wonderful.
Jeremy Corbyns communist hell hole in the UK sounds quite wonderful.
Tinfoilhatsron
Banned
God fucking dammit.
Autodidact
Banned
Assuming dems can retake the senate in 2018 is a pretty big assumption. Likely they'll do well, but the map for midterms is pretty fucking bleak, as far as the senate is concerned.
To get a majority (51 seats), they have to hold onto every single seat, including seats in Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia, as well as win 3 seats, two of which will have to be from deeply red states.
Shit is going to be a hail Mary, which is even more the reason to need to get out and get desperate.
No one has assumed anything. They have a small chance, albeit slightly better in an anti-Trump wave.
Also, their most likely pickups will be in Nevada, Arizona, and Texas. Nevada has swung blue, Arizona has become pretty much purple, and while I concede that Texas may technically be deep-red, it gets more purple every election.
A tall order, but not impossible in the right atmosphere.
You're a fool and you don't know anything about how damaging Alex Jones is if you're so quick to equivocate what he does with me saying the GOP will throw away democracy if it suits them. You make me sick.
excelsiorlef
Member
I really hate asking this (and I try to avoid it but I have to here), are you a man?
Because honestly you talk about this issue like it's not a right you're going to lose.
If the Roe falls, abortions becomes illegal in conservative states, not hard to access, not overtly and unnecessarily regulated, but illegal. It goes bye bye. Not to mention we open up to women going to jail for having one, women being forcefully hospitalized and monitored to make sure she doesn't harm the fetus, and all the way to miscarriages now becoming criminal investigations. Think I'm crazy? Some of that shit already happens. Now Roe means no protection.
And that for all we know they figure out a way to make it illegal on a federal level because Bush pulled a version of that off with his Partial-Birth Abortion Ban.
elrechazado
Banned
There's always hope. Obama won the special elections like Trump, but lost midterms, and Trump's negatives dwarf anything we've seen.Assuming dems can retake the senate in 2018 is a pretty big assumption. Likely they'll do well, but the map for midterms is pretty fucking bleak, as far as the senate is concerned.
To get a majority (51 seats), they have to hold onto every single seat, including seats in Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia, as well as win 3 seats, two of which will have to be from deeply red states.
Shit is going to be a Hail Mary, which is even more the reason to need to get out and get desperate.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Nope, all of that would hurt them in 2018. They will not impeach him until they are essentially obliged to, you'd need some sort of accidental conflict or whatever. They will certainly not impeach him over haggling over who to nominate at the SC.
The right atmosphere would have to be a god damn tidal wave election. I'd be overjoyed, because that would be a hellova election, and signal very bad things for 2020.
Still, tall order is underselling it to the nth degree. Dems need a fucking miracle in 2018. Either way, it doesn't look good.
The only good thing about 2018 is the gubernatorial map looks decent. If the democratic party can run the board on the senate, that will give a ton of state seats and governorships, not that it wouldn't.
The best democrats can do is prey Roberts doesn't retire, Kennedy doesn't retire, RBG doesn't die and that there's a tsunami in the midterms.
I certainly think democrats will gain in midterms, at the very least in the house. But the senate is much more up in the air. The GOP gains in 2014 were mostly in red states (exeption being CO, which is purple). 2010 is a better example, where they gained in Il and Wi (and Pa, which is purple), but held everywhere else.
Still, Illinois is the only state which is as blue as the others are red, and they had a lot of problems before 2010 with corruption.
elrechazado
Banned
A Kennedy spokesperson have a reason for why the clerks reunion was being pushed up months ago, but I can't remember it was. Something to do with scheduling.
It is a pretty scary thought, but on the other hand, SCOTUS has had a conservative majority for over 45 years and we've managed to get on in spite of that.
Autodidact
Banned
No, he's given no indication of retiring; he's actually fairly young, too. He just gives a shit about the image of the court, so he'd likely balk at overturning Roe or any other progressive policy. He pretty much saved the ACA, and Republicans couldn't bitch that much because he's a Republican.
Yes. And so you're right, my perspective on the issue is limited.
It it falls, it falls. You may read that as me being nonchalant, but if certain justices pass away then and your intuitions are right (although I disagree), then it's done. Forces outside of our control at that point.
But we can control how we vote. We can fight for legislatures. And that's what I'm saying. It's not that I don't care if the court swings right and does insane shit (although I have more tempered expectations of how far they'll go), but that if that comes to pass then that battleground is done for until the next series of retirements/justices dying.
No, I just misspoke. Thomas retiring or Breyer dying are more likely. While Thomas would be no great loss, (replaced by someone equally as red), Breyer dying would be almost as bad as RBG, if slightly less likely.
Gabriel_Logan
Member
Oh dear.
Autodidact
Banned
nvm, misread post
elrechazado
Banned
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked