The VP on the winning ticket wins most likely in 2028 and whoever replaces Biden and is elected will win in 2028.

Even Mrs Clinton couldn’t manage that. Not even a dem would appoint the Camel. The Republican elected in November will add conservative number 7 and replace conservative number 1 when Thomas retires. Perhaps that wimp Roberts will be downgraded as chief and replaced by Gorsuch. You are out to lunch and in denial Ms Romero. @beckyromero

@jackjjackson

Seriously, I do not think President Biden in his second term will nominate Harris to SCOTUS. She'd be the presumptive Democrat nominee for president in 2028. Maybe he'll pull a Harding and nominate Obama to the Supreme Court. 😉

Thomas will "retire" only when he goes out feet first.

Time will tell Harris will be out of politics long before 2028. I’ve been mostly correct and you’ve been mostly wrong. At least you’re learning by reading the information I provide. @beckyromero

@jackjjackson
What was I wrong about?

That the Dems would win the 2018 midterms?

That Joe Biden would seek the 2020 presidential nomination?

That Joe Biden would win the 2020 presidential nomination?

That Joe Biden would pick Kamala Harris as his running mate?

That Joe Biden would win the 2020 presidential election?

That Joe Biden would tap Merrick Garland to be U.S. Attorney General?

That the Democrats would win keep control of the Senate & House in 2020?

That the Democrats would keep control of the Senate in 2022 and that losses in the House would be limited?

That Trump would run for president in 2024?

That Joe Biden would run for re-election in 2024?

O.K. so the Cubs are struggling so far this year. But the season has a long way to go and it's a weak diviison.

You cherry picked at most ten percent. @beckyromero

@beckyromero One proposal I've heard is for Sotomayor to resign. Biden then appoints Harris to SCOTUS (placating any voters who would be upset if she were passed over for the presidency, as she'll be on SCOTUS for the next 20-30 years in that case). This frees Biden to pick Newsom or Whitmer or another VP and either resign or end his campaign and anoint that person at the convention.

There will be enormous pressure on Thomas, Alito, and Roberts to retire if Trump is reelected.

The first scenario is plausible despite the camel not being qualified.


Thomas will happily resign and pick his successor. Likely Alito as well however no successor picking for him. Roberts might be harder since he’s younger. However a lot may happen during a Trump term if elected and Roberts will continue to age and will be worries even more about his place in history as CJ #13. [/quote]

@LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson The problem with Biden resigning or dropping out and endorsing Harris has nothing to do with her qualifications, it has to do with her electability. But replacing her with Newsom or Whitmer risks alienating Black women, who are Biden's core constituency. Putting her on the Supreme Court solves that problem. As for her being "unqualified," she was a state AG (not that we need more former prosecutors on SCOTUS). It's not like Barrett or Kavanaugh were qualified either. Anyone who can point at those two and say with a straight face that they were the best possible choices is probably salivating over Aileen Cannon and Matthew Kaczmaryk replacing Thomas and Alito. Thomas was hardly qualified when he was nominated. Bush wanted a conservative Black man to succeed Thurgood Marshall and Thomas was positioned well for that.

Roberts will probably hang on because he is definitely concerned about the legacy of the "Roberts Court" even though that is shot now and will go down in history as the Taney Court of the 21st Century.

Let’s review in December. Harris in SCOTUS will never ever happen. @LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson Agreed. This is just pundits fantasizing. Biden will be the nominee, Harris will be his running mate, and Sotomayor will not resign before the next presidential term.

The problem with SCOTUS is institutional. It won't be solved even if Biden appoints ten new justices.

The only “problem” with the SCOTUS is that the present composition does not agree with you. Patience. @LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson If Hillary had won, we'd have a 6-3 liberal majority and you'd be complaining about "legislating from the bench." The composition of the highest court in the land shouldn't depend on who happens to be in office when a vacancy arises. My issue with the court isn't its composition, but how we select justices and their unchecked power.

Just curious, you don't have a problem with Thomas and Alito accepting undeclared gifts from billionaires and allying themselves openly with extremists? How would you react if it turned out that Elena Kagan had taken expensive vacations courtesy of George Soros, or Ketanji Brown Jackson was flying a BLM flag?

Ginsberg did. She took a lot of exotic adventure trips with her pal Scalia. Fine with me. @LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson Nobody would care if Thomas went on trips with Sotomayor. The problem is going on trips with Harlan Crow and not disclosing them.

Folks like Crow paid for the Ginsburg Scalia junkets. If I was Thomas I’d go with Kagan or Jackson. If I wa me I’d go with Jackson 😉 @LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson Please provide a citation for whoever paid for the Ginsberg Scalia trips. Considering that they were at opposite ends of the political spectrum and almost never voted the same, clearly whoever it was, wasn't trying to influence the court the way Crow was.

The lack of disclosure is also a problem, which you're ignoring.

You’re looking for trouble where none exists. @LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson Right, because anyone who paid for a trip for RBG and Scalia is obviously not interested in influencing anything. If Crow had also paid for Sotomayor and Kagan to take nice vacations, Thomas' accepting what amount to bribes wouldn't be as significant.

Anyway, thanks for admitting that you threw that in as a red herring.

Far from being a red herring those two showed how the court should work. They were collegial despite often having different views. @LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson I agree, but that's a different discussion. Scalia was also confirmed with 98 votes in the Senate. Those days are over.

Now, back to the subject at hand, which are the undeclared gifts from billionaires to Thomas and Alito.

What decisions do you believe were wrongly influenced? @LeopoldBloom

@jackjjackson Crow benefitted directly from Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which weakened the Chevron defense that the court overturned this year. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America affecting discrimination in lending, Acheson Hotels LLC v. Laufer gutting enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Moore v. US affecting a wealth tax.

More significantly, the gifts made it clear to Thomas what he had to lose if he followed the trend observed among many conservative justices of becoming more liberal over the years. The fact that Thomas didn't disclose these gifts, which only became known when ProPublica revealed them, suggests that Thomas knew he was crossing a line and didn't want anyone to know about it.