Ruth Bader Ginsberg's death

**Mama Bear** · 09-19-2020

I am not American, so my understanding and perspective about RBG is far more limited than many of you would have. However, my husband is American and not someone who is usually shaken by 'celebrity' deaths. He was very very upset when I told him about RBG's passing though, saying that her strength of morality had been crucial to trying to keep America from going full Handmaid's Tale/Purge/whatever other dystopian society you can imagine. I know from the LGBTQIA+ people I follow on social media that a lot of people in this community are feeling worried about her replacement with someone staunchly conservative and the impact it'll have. Do you share this sentiment? Why?

As I understand it, one of the key elements moving forward is her replacement. There was a similar situation 4 years ago and the Republicans argued that a replacement shouldn't be put in while voting for the new President had begun (or something like that, something about the election had started). Now, (you need an account to see links), which seems, to me, a double standard. What is your view on this? Should Senate hold off until 2021, as they did with 2016's vacancy?

**♥ PrettySarcastic ♥** · 09-20-2020

Sorry - I had started on a response to this last night and then had an emergency I'm still struggling with emotionally, but this has me fired up and I wanted to share my thoughts.

-----------

Never doubt the hypocrisy of the Republican party.

Mitch McConnell, who in 2016 basically invented this concept of blocking last-year-of-term president's Supreme Court nominee, now has decided that standard he created does not apply because his party has the majority in the Senate. (He alleges he based it on a concept that Biden himself "mused about urging Bush to withhold nominess to the Supreme Court until the end of the 'political season'" back in 1992 after a really rough fight over confirming Justice Clarence Thomas, even though no such 'urging' ended up happening, because no other vacancies became a reality. He and the party went on to call it the "Biden Rule.")

Quoth McConnell in 2016: "The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let's give them a voice. Let's let the American people decide. The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be," McConnell said.

But in 2020, McConnel has decided that what he meant was: "In the last midterm election before Justice Scalia’s death in 2016, Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president’s second term. We kept our promise. Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year."

I think the whole thing is bull, but you know what?

There is a saying -- if you're going to make your bed, you have to sleep in it.

You can't decide in 2016 (when a President nominates a Justice 270 days before his term is over) that the President has no right to nominate a Justice, but in 2020, the President has every right (47 days before an election, when his term may or may not be over, time will tell) to nominate a Justice.

Per former President Obama's (you need an account to see links):

A basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment. The rule of law, the legitimacy of our courts, the fundamental workings of our democracy all depend on that basic principle. As votes are already being cast in this election, Republican Senators are now called to apply that standard.

That's a pretty way to say - you dug your graves in 2016, you hypocrites, now hop in.

Quote sources and therefore interesting and infuriating reading material.
(you need an account to see links)
(you need an account to see links)
(you need an account to see links)
(you need an account to see links)
(you need an account to see links)

**Flordibel** · 09-20-2020

Tw: assault

**SpaceyGirl** · 09-20-2020

The republican party has thrown the law out the window. The whole point of having a set of rules people follow (aka the law) is that it needs to be consistent. They cant just pick and choose what to follow when they feel like it but that is what they've been doing the past 4 years. They should definitely wait until after the election, but they are already showing that is not going to be what happens.

I also normally do not care about deaths from celebrities. There's only been one celebrity death I was very sad about, someone in the music industry, but thinking too much about RBG's death brings me to tears, literally. We've come so far the past 50 years with women's suffrage and LGBTQ+ rights, and we still have a long way to go! But with RBG's death and the republican's terrible handling of... A LOT OF THINGS, I am very fearful for the future. My biggest concern right now is the election. If Trump does something even more shady and we bring it to the supreme court, are they just basically in his pocket?? T_T

**kittyray** · 09-21-2020

**Pidgey** · 09-21-2020

Originally Posted by Flordibel

Tw: assault

Curious if this is in regards to the president.... Biden or whoever will take the seat next...

**Flordibel** · 09-21-2020

Kavanaugh. Well aware of Biden's reputation, too.

**Werewolf** · 09-21-2020

**♥ PrettySarcastic ♥** · 09-21-2020

Originally Posted by Columbidae

Curious if this is in regards to the president.... Biden or whoever will take the seat next...

I don't think your anti-Biden video or pro-Republican Presidential preference is on topic. We can have a pretty spirited debate about that in the debate section if you want. I will probably not be very nice, though.

Mama Bear's question was about the Supreme Court Justice's selection process, and whether or not it was a double standard for the Senate to proceed with hearings on a nominee less than 2 months before an election when they refused to do so ~10 months before an election in 2016.

Did you not have an opinion on this?

Supreme Court Justices may have political leanings but are not Republicans or Democrats. They are meant to be impartial.
(you need an account to see links)

(And I also found your exclusion of the rest of the +TQIA of LGBTQIA+ group curious if not outright discrimnatory.)

**Pidgey** · 09-21-2020

Perhaps I miss read the question asked about having concerns of a conservative replacement, if i shared the opinion and why part. With conservatives being primarily republican I shared my opinion.

My apologies if my opinion upset you.

My opinion on if they should proceed or not, I'm sure we can all agree on is that they should wait until after the election.

Thread: Ruth Bader Ginsberg's death

Thread Tools

Display

Ruth Bader Ginsberg's death

The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Mama Bear For This Useful Post:

The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to PrettySarcastic For This Useful Post:

The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Flordibel For This Useful Post:

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SpaceyGirl For This Useful Post:

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to kittyray For This Useful Post:

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Pidgey For This Useful Post:

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Flordibel For This Useful Post:

The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Werewolf For This Useful Post:

The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to PrettySarcastic For This Useful Post:

Posting Permissions


thanks stardust for base	Thanks Sugarbee	Thanks Wooloo