RBG is dead

[Adolf Allerbush]

Here comes theocracy

Praise be!

[CascadeLuke]

A supreme piece of shit

[frorider]

...

[ex-powderbroker]

thank you for your work in service of this nation Ruth.

[The SnowShow]

A supreme piece of shit

She’s not even cold and that piece of shit comes out gleefully with that? Fuck everyone who keeps him in office.

There needs to be some serious but peaceful protests in front of his office or house or whereeverthefuck this turtle lives.

[CascadeLuke]

Scalia died on February 13, 2016. Roughly 8 months from the election and were at 46 days out now.

[BmillsSkier]

How the fuck does some asshole from backwardass Kentucky have so much damn power over our lives! The fact that it's an unwritten rule to side with the senate majority leader is so fucked up. I don't care if she/he is Democrat or Republican...its just wrong.

I’m honestly not talking politics at all, but the short answer is the same reason the Democrats could control the house for 50 years, elections matter, as well as the right to confirm Executive Branch nominations are Constitutionally vested in the upper house of Congress - none of this is party dependent.

As far as siding with the SML, doesn’t sound like that is the case for at least 4 (R) Senators, which is a good sign for and will hopefully take the nonsense out of this until after the election. Not for political reasons, but for just sanity and equity reasons, both of which are very needed right now.

[hutash]

A sad day for all, she was a lioness of the supreme court. All women should take some time to reflect on just how much she did for them, and men as well. Those of us married to strong, professional women have RBG to thank.

Of course, Trump and Mc Turtle will quickly try to fill the vacancy to MAGA, just like 1950 when blacks and women had minimal power and options.

If anybody votes for either of those two, they deserve a kick in the nuts or vag.

Curious to see if any republicans have morals and a backbone. It appears four may, but that leaves a hell of a lot of them with empty souls. If this country wasn't fucked enough in the last three and a half year, the next few months are are going to be a real hard, dry fuck.

[jackattack]

A slim ray of hope:

Sen. Susan Collins
Sen. Chuck Grassley
Sen. Lisa Murkowski
Sen. Mitt Romney

Have all committed to not voting on a New SCOTUS Justice until after 20 January 2021

That leaves 49 Republican Senators, or less, standing alone.
No majority, no new #SCOTUS

Wow, slim but I’ll take it.

Well, spoken too soon I think.

Romney hasn’t said anything yet, though of all the republican senators to refuse I would expect him to.

Grassley on the other hand

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has said that, if he was still Judiciary Committee chair, he wouldn’t hold a hearing on a nominee this year. But that statement is meaningless, because Graham has succeeded him as the committee chair. Grassley has not committed to vote against any nominee.

And everyone knows Graham is a piece of shit.

[MakersTeleMark]

A powerhouse in the fabric of American history. RIP.

[evdog]

Sad day.

If it wasn't already locked in, this really locks in the christian fundamentalist vote for Trump.

It may also bring out the hard core liberal vote for Biden. Especially once we see who Trump actually nominates. He's said his last two appointments have been a disappointment as they have not voted as conservatively as his base wanted. So it follows that he would nominate someone even more conservative. That could solidify his base before the election. But wouldn't those people vote for him anyways? I think a nutjob nominee could bring out a lot more people for Biden - just in time for the election. Because it will be very front and center and this will make it clear we're not just voting for president, we're voting for future supreme court appointments not to mention all the other federal judge appointments that will come up. Surely Trump's advisors would recognize this as a threat to his re-election. I think it actually puts him in a tough spot. But I see more downside to him for nominating someone the more his base will love that nominee. So maybe he does put it off. If he wins the election all of the appointments are his and he'll have free reign if the Senate stays in Republican control. As mentioned below, putting off the nomination and making it an election issue - "I'll nominate ___ if I win" will bring out his base. But it would also bring out the other side. If he wins re-election we're fucked no matter what.

This will play out as follows: Trump will say that he won't nominate someone until 2021 to force the religious wackos to vote for him. When/if he then loses to Biden he will promptly nominate the worst possible candidate for the senate to ram thru. What a f'ing nightmare.

[rideit]

“BARR SC 2020”!!!!

[Toadman]

I bet Benny chimes in to blame this on Obama for being rich.

They will blame the corrupt DNC, and the notorious HRC.

[CascadeLuke]

Time to tank the budget effort and shut the government down at the end of the month. Cause issue and delay - it’s time to fight. We are headed to a stalemate on it anyhow.

[Toadman]

It may also bring out the hard core liberal vote for Biden. Especially once we see who Trump actually nominates. He's said his last two appointments have been a disappointment as they have not voted as conservatively as his base wanted. So it follows that he would nominate someone even more conservative. That could solidify his base before the election. But wouldn't those people vote for him anyways? I think a nutjob nominee could bring out a lot more people for Biden - just in time for the election. Because it will be very front and center and this will make it clear we're not just voting for president, we're voting for future supreme court appointments not to mention all the other federal judge appointments that will come up. Surely Trump's advisors would recognize this as a threat to his re-election. I think it actually puts him in a tough spot. But I see more downside to him for nominating someone the more his base will love that nominee. So maybe he does put it off. If he wins the election all of the appointments are his and he'll have free reign if the Senate stays in Republican control. As mentioned below, putting off the nomination and making it an election issue - "I'll nominate ___ if I win" will bring out his base. But it would also bring out the other side. If he wins re-election we're fucked no matter what.

Trump isn't going to let McConnell choose the SCOTUS nominee this time around. Trump won't listen to his advisors. He will pick someone who will, in his warped, mob mentality mind, be loyal to him.

[rideit]

Trump isn't going to let McConnell choose the SCOTUS nominee this time around. Trump won't listen to his advisors. He will pick someone who will, in his warped, mob mentality mind, be loyal to him.

See above post #87

[plugboots]

This MFrAttachment 340705

Fucker had that queued up, ready to go.

Party at the White House.

Fuck all these fucking racist motherfuckers.

[old goat]

Horrible news. RIP

It's not a done deal that he gets his nominee pushed through. There is hope. And if he does when Biden wins the election and Democrats take the Senate they add a member to the court.

It would take 4 Republican no votes to deny Trump a nominee--Collins, Murkowski, Romney, Alexander were the 4 Jeff Toobin named.
If the Dems take the Senate and the Senate manages to confirm a nominee in a lame duck session, Congress can pack the court. It can also limit the terms of all sitting and future justices. There is nothing in the Constitution to prevent either action.
If the Republicans hold the Senate it is quite possible McConnell would refuse to confirm a Biden nominated justice for as long as the Republicans hold the Senate.


The Democrats should make it clear that after the Merrit Garland fiasco, they will play as hard and as dirty as necessary to keep a reasonably balanced court--the prospect of court packing and term limits may give enough Republicans pause to vote against a Trump nominee--or make it clear to McConnell that they would do so. Especially any Senators who have lost their seats and have nothing to lose. The fear of civil disorder bordering on insurrection may change a few minds as well

If Trump wins this is all moot.

[old goat]

I’m honestly not talking politics at all, but the short answer is the same reason the Democrats could control the house for 50 years, elections matter, as well as the right to confirm Executive Branch nominations are Constitutionally vested in the upper house of Congress - none of this is party dependent.

As far as siding with the SML, doesn’t sound like that is the case for at least 4 (R) Senators, which is a good sign for and will hopefully take the nonsense out of this until after the election. Not for political reasons, but for just sanity and equity reasons, both of which are very needed right now.

How can someone who uses the abbreviation SML for Senate Majority Leader claim to not be talking politics. : )

[RockChalk]

See above post #87

He's 70...

[skifishbum]

thank you for your work in service of this nation Ruth.

amen
its pretty odd to see and hear all this "were fucked" talk
when the tiny in stature hudge in cultural icon and respect justice spent her whole life
fighting against inequalities of fuckages
sack the fuck up and lead your life in a manner that would make the notorious one smile

[jono]

amen
its pretty odd to see and hear all this "were fucked" talk
when the tiny in stature hudge in cultural icon and respect justice spent her whole life
fighting against inequalities of fuckages
sack the fuck up and lead your life in a manner that would make the notorious one smile

QFT. We're as fucked as we decide to be.

RIP to one hell of a fighter.

[riser4]

RIP Notorious RBG. Peace.

[rideit]

He's 70...

Fair point.
Ben Shapiro, SC ‘20!

However, Trump doesn’t give a shit about anything or anyone beyond his immediate needs.
I wouldn’t say the concept of ‘long term ramifications’ enters his feeble mind.

[Sharon Needles]

May her memory be a blessing.