Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Most ironic political demand of the year . . .

Most ironic political demand of the year . . .

It's time to retire! Democrats are shouting this at supreme court justices Elena Kagan (age 62), and Sonia Sotomayor (68).

No $hit. 100% true. Democrats really, really, are begging for these retirements, according to pieces in “Vox” and elsewhere. For those insulated from a diversity of political views, Vox is “progressive/left of center”, and in addition to its website promotes ifs views through YouTube, Netflix, podcasts, Twitter, etc.

So where's the irony? That an 80-year-old president with either senile dementia or sleeping sickness should remain in office, and appoint successors to SCOTUS justices decades younger than himself?

Or that Vox and similar sites are too effing stupid to be believed?

I'm going with “stupid”

By all accounts justices Kagan (the supreme court's first openly “enthusiastic female softball player”) and Sottomayor (“smarter than a typical wise Latino grandmother”) are more alert, harder working, and better able to speak without cue cards and easter bunny escorts than the president.

And if they decline in vigor – which probably won't be soon – hopefully they will do the right thing, and resign.

Does anyone believe Biden – given the chance – would discover and appoint replacement justices of higher caliber?

I don't regularly follow who votes how on the supreme court. So I can't cite a list of the decisions by left – or right leaning – justices that I disagree with. But I'm sure that if Kagan and Sottomayor were communists or Taleban apologists, someone would have told us.

All this conniving (getting rid of Kagan and Sottomayor) is of course predicated on worry that not only will Biden lose the white house to some republican in 2024, but congress might flip again too.

Hey, Vox unpopuli – the answer to that problem is straightforward. Run a democrat presidential candidate capable of actually governing and explaining his or her decisions.

Unless you don't have any . . . ?
I'm not enamoured with this piece or with Vox in general, but there's more to it, and if Democrats are begging for Sotomayor and Kagan to resign in great numbers, I've missed it.

That being said, I think calling the piece "stupid" on just this basis is a little simplistic.

Ginsburg's hanging on was politically disastrous for Dems and maybe even the Country, and I think there are some decent points in here, even though I don't agree with all of them.

At the end of the day, it seems like this guy needs exposure for his books and Vox gave it to him.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23507944/supreme-court-sonia-sotomayor-elena-kagan-ruth-bader-ginsburg-retire
@SusanInFlorida Ginsburg didn’t retire when she could have been replaced with a younger liberal because she felt Sandra Day O’Connor had been pressured into retiring early, and wasn’t going to let that happen to her.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@LeopoldBloom i did not know that. was she so quoted in an interview?
@SusanInFlorida Not a direct quote from an interview with RBG exactly. More like a knowledgeable inference.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/why-rbg-did-not-retire-obama-presidency.html

I mean, I guess she’s become this feminist icon. And I wonder if it just sort of prevents us from seeing the 85-year-old woman that she is in some ways. A friend of mine who’s a lawyer posted—and I thought this was thoughtful—that there’s this liberal debate of, well, should she have retired while Obama was president? And she was like, you know you’ve got to be careful with that. Because part of feminism is letting people do what they want, and we’ve let these guys work until they’re 90.

Well, that’s what she said. One of the things she says in response to that is like, Weird. Nobody was demanding that John Paul Stevens retire. Nobody was demanding that Stephen Breyer retire. So I think she does see this valence of sexism around it. There was this laser focus on why she wasn’t stepping down, and I think that offends her. For what it’s worth anecdotally, a lot of people have said that she watched Sandra Day O’Connor get forced off the court. That’s itself an amazing feminist story that doesn’t get told, right? Where Chief Justice Rehnquist is incredibly sick. And O’Connor’s husband is incredibly sick. So much so that she said, I’m going to have to next year, she said to the chief justice, I’m going to step down so that I can care for my husband.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
The article you cited is an opinion piece, not a news piece. The author does not reflect the views of most or even many Democrats. As far as Biden is concerned, thank God we have him in the White House and not Trump. At least the nation is moving forward under someone competent.
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
Nothing that you have said is wrong.. However, it does ignore one vital fact. The US system of government is so multi level and diverse that no one has any real prospect of governing effectively. Even if the President, the senate and the Congress get all their ducks lined up, each state is an effective kingdom of its own chosing and will refuse, delay or subvert any decision at the federal level. Now personally I dont think thats a good thing. Because right or wrong, it does create the paralysis we see in America today..😷
@whowasthatmaskedman Taking this OP off to federalism seems like a real stretch.

Must be a slow day.
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@MistyCee In just a "big picture" kind of person.. Of course right and wrong exist. But as long as the best outcome for the greatest number is achieved I will trade Democracy for the Divine Right of Kings. And right now, Democracy "Aint goin' $h*t" for the average American..😷
Northwest · M
I'm sure, in your mind, "Democrats" are calling on Kagan and Sotamayor to resign. But when you stop typing as you sleep walk, you will realize it only happened in your own mind.
Ynotisay · M
Let me guess. Whatever winger swamp you swim in forwarded a story by a Vox writer, who you clearly didn't look in to, and now it becomes "Democrats shouting at the Supreme Court?"

So when you jumped the tracks was it gradual process or did it happen at all at once?

Un-fucking-real. I know you're a troll at this point. No one could makes themselves look so foolish otherwise. Must be a SERIOUS need for attention. So sad.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Ynotisay clearly you either didn't read, or didn't understand my post. what an insult filled rant, complete with curse words.
Ynotisay · M
@SusanInFlorida Blah Blah Blah. You're barking up the wrong little one. I'd say you should sit down and let the grown ups talk but something tells me you've never been told that in your life. So, yeah. Blah Blah Blah.
Replacing those two with younger liberals will have no effect on the conservative majority, and more significantly, doesn’t address the court’s real shortcomings. I would support jurisdiction stripping and the creation of a separate court to handle appellate cases (which the Constitution allows), but there’s no chance of Congress passing anything that bold.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@LeopoldBloom replacing kagan and sottomayor now is a hedge against Biden (or Kamala Harris) losing the 2024 election, and republican nominating their replacements.
@SusanInFlorida I understand that. However, that won't address the systemic issues with the Supreme Court. If you're interested in what those are, I recommend The Case Against the Supreme Court by Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of Berkeley Law. He doesn't bring up my preferred solution, but he makes a strong case for how, with a handful of exceptions, the court has failed in its intended purpose. Replacing Sotomayor and Kagan isn't even a temporary fix.

If Thomas and Alito (the two oldest justices) are replaced in the next two years, we're back to a liberal majority, but that won't address the systemic problems either.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
I'm not American but what strikes me as a greater issue is that the SC is so undemocratic. There is no way that Americans would vote for a Federalist Society majority and the removal of Roe vrs Wade. Rather that retire, justices should be up for re-election.

I get that it is in the Constitution but ( charitably speaking) the Republicans beant conventional norms to get what they wanted. So no wonder Democrats have a hard time accepting this.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@windinhishair well, that's the amendment process. state level ratification. and it doesn't have to be 100%. just 2/3rds. Are you saying you're unfamiliar with how this works? Or that democrats don't control 2/3rds of the states?
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@SusanInFlorida You clearly are clueless about the process and the electoral situation in the US. Foreign bots often are. Allow me to educate you. The Democrats don't control anywhere close to 2/3 of the states. Any Democratic amendment is doomed to fail before it starts, because Republican states will never vote for it. It doesn't matter if 2/3 of the voting public approves of it, like reproductive rights, since the states will never approve of a constitutional amendment for it.
@SusanInFlorida Democrats do not have the trifecta in 33 states. There are currently 23 Republican trifectas, 14 Democratic trifectas, with the remainder having divided governments.
smiler2012 · 56-60
{@susaninflorida] 🤔 now you talk about joe right so how old was trump when he was last in office . how old will he be if his bid to get into office in 2024 is successful that if he is not banged up in a state penitentiary first
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@smiler2012 nothing in my post says i support trump, or want him to run again. why are you hijacking?
smiler2012 · 56-60
@SusanInFlorida 🤔was not my intention to so call hi jack it as you put it . just a comparison that was all i never actully suggested you where a trumpster
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
They want to avoid the mistake they made with Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But this is too young to be showing them the door. That is disrespectful.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@HoraceGreenley they hectored RBG for 2 years to resign. When she died in office, democrat political operators tsk-tsked for months "See . .. I told you so. You're a bad democrat. We hate you now"

It's a mistake to put political pressure on supreme court judges in ANY circumstance, whether that be voting on a case, deciding what cases to hear/exclude, or retirement. They are supposed to be above day to day partisan politics

 
Post Comment