Saturday, November 09, 2024

Dems Trying to Get Sotomayor to Resign, Avoid RBG Repeat

The Democratic Party is secretly fighting over whether to try and force out Justice Sonia Sotomayor to avoid the specter of Donald Trump sending the U.S. Supreme Court further to the right.

Posted by censored at 03:30 PM | 32 COMMENTS | permalink

More

Comments

party leaders are terrified of a repeat of the 2020 debacle when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died during the first Trump presidency after resisting overtures to step down when an Obama administration could offer a like-for-like ideological replacement. Instead, Trump's choice of Seventh Circuit Judge Amy Coney Barrett sent the court lurching further to the right.

#1 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-08 05:32 PM

They're not wrong but I seem to recall that Democrats were unable to get a liberal judge put on the Supreme Court under obama.

#2 | Posted by Tor at 2024-11-08 05:41 PM

They're not wrong but I seem to recall that Democrats were unable to get a liberal judge put on the Supreme Court under obama.
#2 | Posted by Tor

GOP had the majority at the time.

McConnell said it would be inappropriate to put in a new justice when Obama only had a year left in his term. Of course, that didn't stop McConnell from ramming ACB through four years later when Trump only had a couple month's left in his term. Almost like McConnell just says random words and does what he needs to do to accomplish his goals. Dems could learn a thing or two from him.

Right now Dems have control of the Senate and they're unlikely to get that control back in the next couple elections, so this may be the only shot Dems have to get a justice confirmed in the next ten years, if not longer.

#3 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-08 05:57 PM

Dumb move How did that work out for us the last time the Democrats tried to get RBG to resign and she was much older and had more wrong with her medically speaking. She needs to stay where she is at right now.

#4 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-11-08 06:19 PM

This is another situation that illustrates the foolishness of basing Supreme Court appointments on deaths and trying to wheedle older justices to retire.

The way it should work is that each presidential election is followed by a Supreme Court nomination in the spring of the president's new four-year term. If there are nine justices at that time, the justice who has served the longest gets the gold watch and a boot in the ass. If there are fewer than nine because somebody died or retired, nobody needs to leave.

Presidents only get one appointment per four-year term. If this means a court smaller than nine for a bit, that's fine.

#5 | Posted by rcade at 2024-11-08 06:26 PM

Dems Trying to Get Sotomayor to Resign, Avoid RBG Repeat

Franky, I'm a little disheartened and disappointed to see my fellow Progressives embrace such an approach as this.

As we were often reminded by Obama (God I miss him) in the days leading up to her confirmation, it is an Inherent Goodness unto itself to have a Wise Latina on the highest court of the land. She represents a voice (one of many, unfortunately) that for far too long has been missing at the top tier of the American Civic conversation. And now she's here, providing that voice.

That some would choose to overlook this---and just throw it all away in pursuit of tactical politics is abhorrent and wrong.

Let's lift Latinx voices, not discard them.

#6 | Posted by Phir_Milengus at 2024-11-08 06:27 PM

Presidents only get one appointment per four-year term. If this means a court smaller than nine for a bit, that's fine.

Posted by rcade at 2024-11-08 06:26 PM | Reply

It has to be an odd number because if the decision is a tie it only affects that case in that jurisdiction. It doesn't affect the whole country.

#7 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-11-08 06:32 PM

If not all of the nine justices vote on a case, or the Court has a vacancy, then a tied vote is possible. If this occurs, then the decision of the court below is affirmed, but the case is not considered to be binding precedent. The effect is a return to the status quo ante.

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-11-08 06:38 PM

I always blame Obama for not having the guts to just put Garland on the court, F--that turtle. He could have said something like, "By refusing to do it's job, the Senate has given the decision to me". Or somesuch.
If Trump proved anything, it's better to just do something and let the lawyers figure it out later.

#9 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2024-11-08 06:40 PM

#6 | Posted by Phir_Milengus

That's some funny stuff!

Now how about coming up with something that actually protects the rights of 340 million Americans instead of setting the stage for a 7-2 talibaptist SCOTUS?

#10 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-08 07:12 PM

Excuse me?

Now how about coming up with something that actually protects the rights of 340 million Americans

How, exactly, is having a Woman of Color on the Supreme Court incongruent with this goal?

I think you need to check yourself.

#11 | Posted by Phir_Milengus at 2024-11-08 07:35 PM

RGB had been diagnosed with cancer for years. Does Sotomayor have any comparable health problems? If not, this is just another dumb move by Democrats. (Yes, she's diabetic, but that's much easier to control.)
Even if Trump 2.0 doesn't implode like Trump 1.0 did, she's going to be around for a while, barring some unforeseen event that could happen regardless of age.

#12 | Posted by sentinel at 2024-11-08 07:43 PM

How, exactly, is having a Woman of Color on the Supreme Court incongruent with this goal? I think you need to check yourself.
#11 | Posted by Phir_Milengus

You're a comedian, right? Great stuff, really!

#13 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-08 07:54 PM

It's mao's new sock puppet.

#14 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2024-11-08 07:54 PM

How, exactly, is having a Woman of Color on the Supreme Court incongruent with this goal? I think you need to check yourself.
#11 | Posted by Phir_Milengus
You're a comedian, right? Great stuff, really!
#13 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-08 07:54 PM

Two socks one c-ck.

#15 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2024-11-09 07:42 PM

"I always blame Obama for not having the guts to just put Garland on the court, F--that turtle. He could have said something like, "By refusing to do it's job, the Senate has given the decision to me".

What happened the other 14 times a nomination lapsed? Garland wasn't the first time a nomination lapsed ...

#16 | Posted by homerj at 2024-11-10 09:27 AM

no big deal and certainly not some shady thing.....

I listened to a blog discussion where some conservatives were saying the same thing

concerning Thomas and Alito.

#17 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-11-10 09:32 AM

no big deal and certainly not some shady thing..... I listened to a blog discussion where some conservatives were saying the same thing concerning Thomas and Alito.
#17 | Posted by shrimptacodan

Difference being that it appears conservatives seem to be more willing to make sure they win (like Kennedy retiring), while Dems are caught up in ego (like RBG refusing to retire when the going was good, Breyer putting up a fight before finally resigning at age 83, and Sotomayor refusing to call it quits).

Doing whatever it takes to come out on top. Say what you will about the tenets of MAGAts, at least it's a ethos.

#18 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-10 09:47 AM

Shhh, you're going to screw up the Wise Latina bit.

You are never allowed to question judges if they're in your party and the party name starts with a D.

#19 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2024-11-10 09:56 AM

Dems do have this embedded ideology. They are always scheming corrupt bastrds that consider themselves as compassionate economic elites that always outsmart themselves.

#20 | Posted by Robson at 2024-11-10 11:50 AM

#9, Merrick Garlands obvious bias against justice does not now and never did give him the character to be on SCOTUS - IMHO.

#21 | Posted by Robson at 2024-11-10 11:59 AM

concerning Thomas and Alito.

#17 | Posted by shrimptacodan a

without the need for urgency....of course

#22 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2024-11-10 12:35 PM

It has to be an odd number because if the decision is a tie it only affects that case in that jurisdiction. It doesn't affect the whole country.

Tell that to Republicans. How long did they allow that to happen when they refused Garland and eventually got Cavanaugh in.

#23 | Posted by brass30 at 2024-11-10 02:19 PM

She should retire asap. That is what right wing GOP would do.

#24 | Posted by moder8 at 2024-11-10 03:37 PM

www.nbcnews.com

Sen. Bernie Sanders says he does not support urging Justice Sonia Sotomayor to step down
In an interview on "Meet the Press," the senator said it would not be "sensible" to ask Sotomayor to step down while Biden is still in office.

#25 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-11-10 03:38 PM

In an interview on "Meet the Press," [Bernie] said it would not be "sensible" to ask Sotomayor to step down while Biden is still in office.
#25 | Posted by LauraMohr

I don't think it's sensible," Sanders said, without elaborating on his position further.
He's convinced me! Makes perfect sense that she should not retire while Biden is in office.

Sonia should retire early April next year. So she can enjoy the spring weather.

#26 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-10 04:11 PM

He's convinced me! Makes perfect sense that she should not retire while Biden is in office.
Sonia should retire early April next year. So she can enjoy the spring weather.

Posted by censored at 2024-11-10 04:11 PM | Reply

Oh do STFU CENSORED. Your track record as of late on being correct has been abysmal.

#27 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-11-10 04:15 PM

It will never get thru the confirmation in time, leaving it to Trump.

#28 | Posted by fortfisher at 2024-11-10 04:38 PM

Oh do STFU CENSORED. Your track record as of late on being correct has been abysmal.
#27 | Posted by LauraMohr

Correct about what? The election? I never made any predictions, given the stupidity of the American voter, but I said from the get-go that I didn't think Black-Indian woman Kamala was going to win. The only hope I had was that Dems would keep the House. And it was only that, a hope.

But you think senile-Biden had a chance after he defecated himself on the debate stage for 90 minutes on national television? You don't have to take my word for it.

President-elect Trump was on track to win 400 electoral votes in a head-to-head race against President Biden, according to the White House's own internal polls.

The news was revealed by Jon Favreau, a one-time speechwriter for former President Obama who now hosts the liberal Pod Save America podcast.

"Joe Biden's decision to run for president again was a catastrophic mistake," Favreau added. "They refused to acknowledge until very late, that anyone could be upset about inflation. And they just kept telling us that his presidency was historic and it was the greatest economy ever."

Favreau accused Team Biden of "shivving" Vice President Harris and telling reporters quietly that she could not win.
nypost.com

#29 | Posted by censored at 2024-11-10 04:38 PM

Dem elites love making conniving secret plans against average Dems and average Americans. Thats why average Americans have no affinity to Dems.

It could be decades if ever before MSM, and Dems are ever considered a mainstream party to blacks, college kids and Californians.

#30 | Posted by Robson at 2024-11-10 06:08 PM

**k! the Democratic Party leaders whose leadership has brought us to this perilous place, perhaps they should resign and quit asking us for money which seems to be wasted in losing elections.It ismportant that Justices write opinions even even when in the minority of the Court and that they argue for yheir opinion publicly and on record in the press.

#31 | Posted by danni at 2024-11-10 09:18 PM

It does seem to me that incumbent Denocrats don't want tp accepy any blame for losing the majority in yhe Senate; I think stronger outcry about thedeaths of thousands of Palestinians and radical Supreme Court decisions such as Citizens United and the overturning of Roe v Wade could have helprd to create more public anger about those decisions. When they voted to overturn Roe how many Senators on thvoted to overturn iy e Judiciary Committee even spoke out about the fact that several now sitting Justices lied when asked about their position about that precedent and then voted to overturn it as if that was their plan all along.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2024-11-10 09:31 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Trump Picks Matt Gaetz as Attorney General (161 comments)

Trump Picks Fox News Host for Defense Secretary (138 comments)

Trump Picks Musk, Ramaswamy for Government Efficiency Effort (45 comments)

Trump to Name Marco Rubio as Secretary of State (42 comments)

The End of America's Well-Intentioned Empire (40 comments)

Trump to Launch Massive Attack Against Higher Education (35 comments)

Who Really Supports Free Speech? (34 comments)

Trump Names Noem Homeland Security Czarina (28 comments)

Guardian no Longer Posting on X (20 comments)

2024's Other Big Loser -- Mainstream Media (19 comments)