Ginsburg isn’t retiring

[StLucieBengal]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/25572/justice-ruth-bader-ginsberg-isnt-retiring-supreme-emily-zanotti

Looks like we are just waiting out her death. I can’t imagine she makes it past 2020 and quite Frankly I can’t see the dems with anyone that could beat Trump anyway.

We get an originality for Kennedy then the court will finally start doing he right thing and stay in their lane.

Quote:Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg Isn't Retiring From The Supreme Court Anytime Soon

The Notorious RBG will stay on the court until at least 2020.

Emily ZanottiJanuary 9, 2018

AP Photo/Michael Dwyer
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg has no plans to retire anytime soon, it seems. The Notorious RBG has already hired on a group of Supreme Court clerks for the court's 2019-2020 season.

Ginsberg is one of the court's most liberal members, but she's already 85 years old, and court watchers were hoping that she'd vacate her seat before she is forced to resign from the court because of ill health. But RBG has no intention, it seems, of being willingly replaced by President Donald Trump, so she'll hold on as long as possible, even if that means being on the nation's pre-eminent judicial body when she's nearing 90.

"If Democrat Hillary Clinton had won the presidency in 2016, liberal Ginsburg would likely have announced her retirement by this spring," CNN reports. "Instead the justice who made her name as a women’s rights lawyer in the 1970s apparently is not counting on leaving the stage any time soon."

If Donald Trump remains undefeated in 2020, Ginsberg will have to face an interesting choice: retire and hope that Republicans choose a more moderate member of the federal judiciary to replace her, or gamble on her health for another four years, delaying her retirement until well into her 90s.

It is a good bet, of course; Ginsberg has had two bouts with cancer, one in 1999 and one a decade later, and survived both. She gets regular checkups, CNN claims, and she has quite the workout regimen, which she says keeps both her mind and body in tip-top shape.

The future isn't so clear for other Supreme Court justices. Both Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy have signaled a desire for a more permanent retirement from the bench, and replacing them would be more important than replacing the Notorious RBG. After all, even if RBG retires, Trump would likely have to pick a more moderate judge to replace her, to appease the Democratic senators he'd need to push the nomination through.

If swing vote Anthony Kennedy retires, and is replaced by a conservative, that permanently changes the court's structure, and gives the edge to Originalists and Constitutionalists for the foreseeable future.

[GMDino]

I was under the impression from those on the right that SCJ's do not allow their politics to get involved?

[Johnny Cupcakes]

She will retire immediately after a new president is sworn in roughly 3 years from now.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-09-2018, 03:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: I was under the impression from those on the right that SCJ's do not allow their politics to get involved?

Originalists don’t allow politics to get involved. Honestly we should have a whole court of originalists who stick to the constitution no matter the issue.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-09-2018, 03:36 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: She will retire immediately after a new president is sworn in roughly 3 years from now.

Yeah I can’t see anyone beating Trump in 2020. Especially if the dems are trotting names out like Oprah, Pocahantas, Sanders, Biden, Gillibrad, Harris or Booker. All of them will get pushed around by Trump in a campaign. Maybe Biden stands a chance but even democrats have shown to not be able to get behind him lockstock before.

Honestly if the dems wanted to win they would recruit Kasaich to Run since he is basically a democrat. But he still doesn’t drive out the votes.

[GMDino]

(01-09-2018, 03:39 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Originalists don’t allow politics to get involved.   Honestly we should have a whole court of originalists who stick to the constitution no matter the issue.

Well that would allow for slavery so I guess *some* people would be happier....

[CKwi88]

(01-09-2018, 03:36 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: She will retire immediately after a new president is sworn in roughly 3 years from now.

I wouldn't be surprised if two or three are waiting for a more stable president to retire.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(01-09-2018, 03:43 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Yeah I can’t see anyone beating Trump in 2020. Especially if the dems are trotting names out like Oprah, Pocahantas, Sanders, Biden, Gillibrad, Harris or Booker.  All of them will get pushed around by Trump in a campaign.   Maybe Biden stands a chance but even democrats have shown to not be able to get behind him lockstock before.

Honestly if the dems wanted to win they would recruit Kasaich to Run since he is basically a democrat.   But he still doesn’t drive out the votes.

Careful. I was over-confident once regarding a presidential election. Never again.

Voter turnout will be much higher for liberals and there will not be as high of a number of third-party voters.  In order for Trump to be re-elected, he should try to stop alienating the people with functioning brains within his own party.  I'm not saying it's impossible for him to be elected again, but I don't see it as a very easy road.

(01-09-2018, 04:00 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: I wouldn't be surprised if two or three are waiting for a more stable president to retire.

Waiting until his replacement is in office is a great service to their country.

[Vas Deferens]

"Waiting out her death"

What a kind christian sentiment.

[Belsnickel]

(01-09-2018, 03:39 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Originalists don’t allow politics to get involved. Honestly we should have a whole court of originalists who stick to the constitution no matter the issue.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[StLucieBengal]

(01-09-2018, 04:33 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Careful. I was over-confident once regarding a presidential election. Never again.

Voter turnout will be much higher for liberals and there will not be as high of a number of third-party voters.  In order for Trump to be re-elected, he should try to stop alienating the people with functioning brains within his own party.  I'm not saying it's impossible for him to be elected again, but I don't see it as a very easy road.


Waiting until his replacement is in office is a great service to their country.

If the dems had a candidate that I thought could take trump on then I would be worried. It won’t be a landslide..... it will be tight but in true end you can’t throw mud on trump. He is a mud monster and when he hits back he drops the hammer. I just don’t think any of them can handle that type of campaign. If someone like Romney, Bush, or Rubio was president then there would be Serious cause to worry. Then again we wouldn’t have all the regulation wins either.

In the end we will have the same kid crying again on the streets when trump is sworn in again.

Plus the media is going to be even worse his time around.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-09-2018, 05:05 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Post all the Scalia personal or political bias that wasn’t directly reflected In the constitution.

[*PhilHos*]

(01-09-2018, 03:21 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: https://www.dailywire.com/news/25572/justice-ruth-bader-ginsberg-isnt-retiring-supreme-emily-zanotti

Looks like we are just waiting out her death.  I can’t imagine she makes it past 2020 and quite Frankly I can’t see the dems with anyone that could beat Trump anyway.  

I don't know. If the rumors are true, I gotta think Oprah would beat him handily.

(01-09-2018, 03:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: I was under the impression from those on the right that SCJ's do not allow their politics to get involved?

No no no, we don't WANT their politics to get involved. 

[GMDino]

(01-09-2018, 05:27 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't know. If the rumors are true, I gotta think Oprah would beat him handily.


No no no, we don't WANT their politics to get involved. 

Well, what I meant was that it shouldn't matter who nominates them as long as they are not influenced by their politics.  Right?

I mean other than Obama not getting even a hearing for his choice because...uh....reasons?

[StLucieBengal]

(01-09-2018, 05:27 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I don't know. If the rumors are true, I gotta think Oprah would beat him handily.


No no no, we don't WANT their politics to get involved. 

Oprah looks great now. But she has scandals. And does she really want her skeletons to come out? The thing with trump as I said before he is a Kid monster and when you throw mud at him he looks the same. Oprah can’t afford any scandals and the reality is you don’t become that wealthy and powerful without some scandal.

Trump has been bulletproof because the NYT spent the 80’s and 90’s going at him hard. Everyone already knows he is an ahole who is blunt and often times says the inappropriate thing.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-09-2018, 04:53 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: "Waiting out her death"

What a kind christian sentiment.

She is older than dirt, Falls asleep on the job, and looks like the crypt keeper. Obviously I don’t wish death on her but the signs are pointing to her end. If This was Logan’s Run her Red crystal would be flashing.

[Belsnickel]

(01-09-2018, 05:26 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Post all the Scalia personal or political bias that wasn’t directly reflected In the constitution.

I'm not going to bother creating a wall of text here, I will simply use Scalia's own words. From this site, which discusses two of Scalia's best known speeches, we can see that Scalia himself acknowledged that the originalist approach is an interpretation of the Constitution. Interpretation is subjective, plain and simple. There is a quote from him here, as well:

Quote:I do not think the Constitution, or any text, should be interpreted either strictly or sloppily; it should be interpreted reasonably. Many of my interpretations do not deserve the description "strict”. I do believe, however, that you give the text the meaning it had when it was adopted.

You see, politics is everything. Everything is politics. Politics is nothing more than how we figure out how we live together in this world we inhabit. Judges and justices are political creatures. Whether they be originalists or not, they are applying their subjective views to the interpretation of the document. There are constitutional scholars on both of these sides, and other sides, of this debate.

[Vas Deferens]

(01-09-2018, 06:02 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: She is older than dirt, Falls asleep on the job, and looks like the crypt keeper. Obviously I don’t wish death on her but the signs are pointing to her end. If This was Logan’s Run her Red crystal would be flashing.

You regularly seem to conveniently recontextualize your statements. If it was so 'obvious' you wouldn't have phrased it as such the first time.

[Belsnickel]

(01-09-2018, 03:43 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Yeah I can’t see anyone beating Trump in 2020. Especially if the dems are trotting names out like Oprah, Pocahantas, Sanders, Biden, Gillibrad, Harris or Booker. All of them will get pushed around by Trump in a campaign. Maybe Biden stands a chance but even democrats have shown to not be able to get behind him lockstock before.

Honestly if the dems wanted to win they would recruit Kasaich to Run since he is basically a democrat. But he still doesn’t drive out the votes.

The willingness with which you utilize racial slurs is astonishing.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-09-2018, 07:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The willingness with which you utilize racial slurs is astonishing.

I certainly think Lucie is a racist, but I don't think mocking Warren for lying about having Native American ancestry really qualifies as a racial slur.