You have commented 299 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Ginsburg Gambled on Hillary - and Lost
From April, 2017, but seems relevant again, given the fake news about RBG retiring.
[The Hill] The confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the United States Supreme Court represents a huge political victory for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who gambled on blocking the nomination of Merrick Garland in the hopes of a GOP electoral victory.

It may also have been an equally huge loss for the of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who ignored increasing calls for her retirement during the Obama administration to avoid the prospect of the flipping of her seat from a liberal to a conservative member. That gamble ‐ whatever calculation ‐ could now cost a sweeping number of key cases hanging by a 5-4 margin, including much of the precedent built around Roe v. Wade, if not an outright overturning of that decision.Now Ginsburg’s gamble on Hillary Clinton being elected could have sweeping impact on precedent that she played a major role in creating. With the elimination of the filibuster, the next nominee is hardly likely to be nuanced. Without the filibuster, Republicans have no excuse to compromise on a moderate. There is nothing standing in the way to appointing someone who is openly opposed to cases like Roe v. Wade. There is no plausible deniability based on the need to get to 60. In other words, the market has changed and the stock went bust.

From the use of race in college admissions to abortion to police powers, the GOP could achieve objectives in this administration that have eluded Republican presidents for over six decades. It is not clear if Ginsberg was betting more heavily on herself or Hillary, but many may conclude that the bet was reckless given the stakes on the table. For a few years on the Court, Ginsburg risked Trump "running the table" and the odds now favor precisely such a result.
But Roberts assures us they aren't political. Just unbiased Beacons of Justice. No Obama judges, no Clinton judges, ....
Posted by:Bobby

#5  Covertly make her office a Faraday cage
Posted by: Frank G   2018-11-22 12:25  

#4  Maybe they'll replace her with an RBGbot and we'll never even know.
Posted by: Abu Uluque   2018-11-22 12:22  

#3  What does your constitution say about zombies serving on SCOTUS?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2018-11-22 06:59  

#2  With Roberts on the court I consider the court to be evenly split 4-4-1. Ginsburg still needs replaced.
Posted by: Airandee    2018-11-22 03:02  

#1  Why do I keep having a mental image of a black suit of hi-tech armor:
Darth Ruth: "Hssss* Progressives will bring peace and order to the United States! *Hsss*""
Posted by: magpie   2018-11-22 02:24