Skip to comments.Much depends on Ginsburg
Posted on 03/16/2014 6:47:58 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg should retire from the Supreme Court after the completion of the current term in June. She turned 81 on Saturday and by all accounts she is healthy and physically and mentally able to continue. But only by resigning this summer can she ensure that a Democratic president will be able to choose a successor who shares her views and values. --SNIP--
Indeed, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who will turn 76 this summer, should also carefully consider the possibility of stepping down this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Who do they think they're fooling with that canard?
I guess the LA Times is agitating for a long-term guaranteed four person liberal wing of the court right now, with the hope that one of the other five will pass on during Obama’s term. That combination would cement a generation and a half of a liberal, activist SJC.
Even with all the other destructive, unAmerican, anti-Constitutional crap that we’ve been handed by Zero and 0bamunists, appointments to the Supreme Court will be a legacy lasting well beyond his tenure in office.
I’m praying for good health for Ginsburg, and Breyer, and all the rest.
We will not be better off if Zero loads the Court.
A left wing court at this stage in our history will cement the Republic’s tomb.
I’m thinking we will see justice holder or justice sunstien, either one will fly through the senate.
Historically, these geezers hold on until they feel so badly they can’t sit at the bench. It’s about power and prestige. Yet the court is handling fewer cases than it did in the past.
Frankly, I hope these two hold on into the next president’s term. Please, please, please...
From the hold on to the last goes for just about everybody in politics. A Democratic governor had been elected and the GOP begged Senator Strom Thurmond who was in his nineties to retire so the outgoing Republican could appoint a Republican replacement. He refused, despite the numerous photos of him asleep and drooling on the Senate floor. He died shortly after the Democrat took control and he, of course, appointed a Democrat. (Power and control. Being a Senator or a Supreme Justice is who they are. To give it up is to die.)
This thread appeared yesterday on an article from American Thinker:
These sorts of things come from the White House. They are written by the twentysomething foot soldiers in the Obama Crime Family and then handed off to the media who turn around and publish it, usually with very few changes. This is how journalism works these days.
The White House sees the handwriting on the wall. They are going to lose the Senate, so they have a very short window to confirm a nomination to the Supreme Court. Too short, I believe. Democrat Senators standing for election this year in Red states are unlikely to vote to confirm an Obama liberal nominee in the run up to the election and there won’t be enough time in the lame duck session to get it done.
I’m personally hoping that she stays true-to-form for a Democrat Politician. Staying there with the notoriety, attention, money and power, butt kissing and dogmatic ideology as long as she possibly can.
They don’t ever go away unless it looks like they’ll be voted out of office (not possible for her), convicted of a crime and imprisoned (again, not possible for her), or they are Gramercy Parked by another Democrat.
Looks like Ginsberg and Breyer better watch their backs. The far left wants then outta there.
In that picture, she is just tying her tennis shoes.
Gotta get younger commies on SCOTUS before losing the Senate.
If Hillary becomes president, I think we will see Justice Obama. He is, after all, a Constitutional scholar. It wouldn’t be the first time (Howard Taft).
If Hillary becomes president, the make up of SCOTUS will mean nothing to me. I'll be living in a different country.
“A left wing court at this stage in our history will cement the Republics tomb.”
Hate to tell ya but Bush’s appointment of Roberts did
just that. In other words we already have a liberal
LA Times editors are whores to the left wing marxist ideology.It’s always what’s good for the lefists and damn the needs of the country.
Are you kidding me?
Do you know how many Republicans voted against Ginsburg? Three is the answer.
You have a point, but both parties behave differently during elections. For example, our “great” Senator Roberts behaves like a conservative and claims to remember where Kansas is.
“Looks like Ginsberg and Breyer better watch their backs.”
“Pelican Brief” without Darby Shaw.
Ginsburg looks like Norman Bates' dead mother.
RBG, the same RBG that wrote a paper in support of lowering the age of consent to 11 years old for sex between a minor and adult.......resign, hell she shouldn’t even be on the bench
The LA Times is simply the mouthpiece. This is coming straight from the White House. They know that they are going to lose the Senate and need to act now.
The Hydra had many heads. The Obama administration—indeed the whole progressive movement—has many mouths.
Jackson is 72; Sharpton will be 60 this year. Neither is a lawyer or has any legal expertise (tho that is not technically a requirement, in reality it is).
The idea is to get 2 justices on the court who will be there impacting national policy for a long, long time. They want them to be @ 50-55 years old. By 60, s/he’s too old for this purpose, unless it’s Eric Holder who’d probably prefer to return to the private sector making $1000/hour for consulting.
They want it done NOW before the balance of power in the Senate might swing to the GOP.
Looks like the LA Slimes is conceding the Senate to the Republicans.
However, I doubt the Republican Senate could withstand the constant pressure in the media by holding up SCT appointments for two years in the hope of a Republican President.
There’s no need to wait for a death or resignation to form a Leftist SCOTUS.
We already HAVE one.
Or did you forget the ObamaCare decision?
Why stack the court, when you have the Chicago Machine?
This is why we NEED a GOP-controlled Senate this election. One that not only replaces Democrats with new GOP Senators in the model of Ted Cruz, but also puts them into a position of power where they can force Obama to moderate his SCOTUS picks under threat of them getting voted down.
I know we’re not going to get a real Conservative on the Court until there’s another GOP President. But I want Ginsburg and Breyer to be replaced by the Democrat version of Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy.
Good luck with that. They are not going to “step down” until they are carried out feet first. :-)
The words “moderate” and “Obama” do not belong in the same sentence.
My comment should have had a Sarc label on it, but the intent of the post was to say Obama will choose a black radical to replace Ginsberg and Republicans will go along with it for fear of being called racists.
Hypocrisy Alert: The same L.A. Times that is now urging Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire because of her advanced age (81), enthusiastically supported Dianne Feinstein’s 2012 Senate re-election bid even though she’ll be 84 decrepit years old when her term expires.
I tend to think he’d appoint a radical leftist black who no one outside their little world has ever heard of. No one with a paper trail, who never said/did anything controversial. Basically a stealth candidate who, once confirmed, would be treacherous.
Once you see Chemirinsky’s name you need go no further. Nothing he has to say is of any relevance to any rational person.
Both of them are dependable communists. This is all about getting two newer, younger communists of a more diverse nature, like the wise Latina. They both vote the right way, but they aren’t diverse enough.
On the other hand, if she wants anything resembling a replacement who excels at the law, even by liberal standards, she will wait until Obama is gone.
Also, while the Dems are still in control of the Senate, 0 can appoint the most radical left winger and the Pubs can’t filibuster. Come November, if the Pubs take over the Senate, then hopefully 0s picks won’t just sail thru.
No, ol’ Strom finished his term, and he died about six months after “retiring” from the Senate. And Loveable Lindsey was hailed by the uninformed of SC to replace him. He never knew his mystery daughter would be made public.
People in CA will always have a need for their daily fix of DiFi; she should live forever to “represent” those uninformed masses.
As I recall Orin Hatch said the President has a right to his choices for the court. Buzzy was a suggestion from Hatch as one that would face little opposition.
I think a likely choice, if Obama gets to nominate another justice, is Kamala Harris, Attorney General of California, who is 49. She is part black and part Asian, so Obama would get another “first.” For sure anyone succeeding to Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat will be female, and I would really be surprised if Obama ever selected a male for the court even if one of the other seats opened up.
Black/Asian/Female....a threefer. If she’s a lesbian, can we go for 4 checkoffs?
Instead of checks, Scotus and Congress provide false constitutional backup to Him and His diktats.
One prez, nine black robes, and 535 congressmen/senators coerce over 320 million. These are the topmost echelons of the despotic class, the uniparty.
Voting increasingly serves to condone criminality, to decide who gets to determine what the law is.
Reform will never come from those who profit so well from the current anti-constitutional system.
There is only one possible, though certainly not assured process that offers a return to republican freedom.
Barry, our first openly LGBT-sympathtic POTUS, needs, NEEDS I tell you, to appoint a gay, black, Communist to the SCOTUS to balance out the gay, white lesbian Communist already seated.
Gosh, don't you just wish Reggie Love were a lawyer! Also in the running. Raúl Castro, Lula, and Ellen deGeneres. I find it most unsporting of you in your willingness to deny our first gay non-totally white, foreign-born POTUS the chance to stamp his legacy on Obamerica!