RIP Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-us-canada-494...
Notorious RBG is gone.
With 22 Republican Senate seats at risk in November, the fight to appoint her successor will be tense.
Factoids: juristic and political enemies, RBG and Antonin Scalia were buddies in personal life. They went to the opera together for decades. Usually writing on opposing sides in split decisions, they wrote one Judicial Opinion together, holding Mareva Injunctions to be unconstitutional in the United States.
Notorious RBG is gone.
With 22 Republican Senate seats at risk in November, the fight to appoint her successor will be tense.
Factoids: juristic and political enemies, RBG and Antonin Scalia were buddies in personal life. They went to the opera together for decades. Usually writing on opposing sides in split decisions, they wrote one Judicial Opinion together, holding Mareva Injunctions to be unconstitutional in the United States.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/...
The cynicism of the Reps with regard to the blocking of Garland in 2016 was something to behold.
Even if Biden wins, Trump will maintain a toxic legacy through his partisan appointments to the Federal Bench at all levels.
Obama apparently urged RBG to retire so that he could appoint a younger version of her in her place, but RBG, perhaps mistakenly, said no.
The cynicism of the Reps with regard to the blocking of Garland in 2016 was something to behold.
Even if Biden wins, Trump will maintain a toxic legacy through his partisan appointments to the Federal Bench at all levels.
Obama apparently urged RBG to retire so that he could appoint a younger version of her in her place, but RBG, perhaps mistakenly, said no.
surveyor_101 said:
Breadvan72 said:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/...
The cynicism of the Reps with regard to the blocking of Garland in 2016 was something to behold.
Even if Biden wins, Trump will maintain a toxic legacy through his partisan appointments to the Federal Bench at all levels.
Obama apparently urged RBG to retire so that he could appoint a younger version of her in her place, but RBG, perhaps mistakenly, said no.
Putting that in context the Judge Kavanaugh was just a very toxic failed attempt to smear a judge with a clean record with some nutty pro demcrat lady who's story had more holes than swiss cheese. The cynicism of the Reps with regard to the blocking of Garland in 2016 was something to behold.
Even if Biden wins, Trump will maintain a toxic legacy through his partisan appointments to the Federal Bench at all levels.
Obama apparently urged RBG to retire so that he could appoint a younger version of her in her place, but RBG, perhaps mistakenly, said no.
surveyor_101 said:
Breadvan72 said:
Are you kidding? The evidence against Kavanaugh was overwhelming. He is a disgrace to his office.
In terms of the assault claim by Ford, the FBI weren't of same opinion.You may fault his performance as a judge I am not up to speed with that, so you may be right but the sex assault claim was a hatchet job by the demo-rats!
The fact that she changed her story several times and claimed to have called on a mobile phone which was not commercially available at the time! She also described the wrong street!
RDMcG said:
There is a slight possibility that Romney will organize a resistance to the appointment of a new judge prior to the election. There are a number of vulnerable GOP senators like Susan Collins from Maine who could swing the vote.
Collins is very vulnerable, and it only needs her, Romney, and one other GOP Senator to hold off an appointment until after the election.McConnell, by the way, who knows no shame, was calling for a Senate vote within an hour or so of RBG's death being announced. This is the same McConnell who decreed that in 2016 there could be no appointment in an election year, because the US people must have a voice in the appointment.
SmoothCriminal said:
Breadvan72 said:
RDMcG said:
There is a slight possibility that Romney will organize a resistance to the appointment of a new judge prior to the election. There are a number of vulnerable GOP senators like Susan Collins from Maine who could swing the vote.
McConnell, by the way, who knows no shame, was calling for a Senate vote within an hour or so of RBG's death being announced. This is the same McConnell who decreed that in 2016 there could be no appointment in an election year, because the US people must have a voice in the appointment.Your opinions are so risible that they are not worth engaging with, but your ignorance of the facts shines through. Iran peace deal? You really, really, really need to start looking some stuff up. It must be very hard to navigate through life under such a cloud of unreason and prejudice, but help is out there.
This aspect of the US judiciary is far too political. Appointments should have nothing to do with who is currently in office.
surveyor_101 said:
So the FBI didn't say there was a no case.
What's the source for this? BBC said:
"They report any corroborating information that they obtain, or any contradicting information," former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker told CNN, but added that "they do not make conclusions" in their reports.
Former FBI Assistant Director Steve Pomerantz told Fox News: "Hopefully they provide enough information within their reports that allow a reasonable person to reach a conclusion based on the work that they've done."
Because it is not a criminal inquiry, witnesses were not compelled to co-operate with the investigation, but lying to an FBI agent does carry the threat of federal charges.
Former FBI Assistant Director Steve Pomerantz told Fox News: "Hopefully they provide enough information within their reports that allow a reasonable person to reach a conclusion based on the work that they've done."
Because it is not a criminal inquiry, witnesses were not compelled to co-operate with the investigation, but lying to an FBI agent does carry the threat of federal charges.
A good piece on the career of RBG. There is also a documentary about her, and a Hollywood movie about her early career. My sixteen year old daughter is sad at the passing of one of her feminist icons, but says that RBG remains an inspiration to her.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep...
HarryW said:
Yes good piece,
I pondered with hindsight; perhaps she should have listened to Obama About a successor whilst he was still in office, as now there is a risk to her legacy.
Also I can’t help at being concerned that positions such as hers should ever have a political slant. The judiciary must always be and remain above politics.
RBG should have heeded Obama.I pondered with hindsight; perhaps she should have listened to Obama About a successor whilst he was still in office, as now there is a risk to her legacy.
Also I can’t help at being concerned that positions such as hers should ever have a political slant. The judiciary must always be and remain above politics.
One of the defects of the US Constitution is that SCOTUS has become a politicised body. This may have been inevitable once Marbury v Madison was decided in the early decades of the Republic, and the Court was mucho politico in the years before and after the Civil War, but SCOTUS really became the political battleground that is now is from about the 1970s.
If Trump is blocked from appointing a Judge before the election, and he then loses but litigates to overturn the result, a 5 to 3 conservative to liberal court may have to rule on his challenge. If push comes to shove, I think that Roberts and Gorsuch will uphold the Constitution and not bow to a Trump bid to stay in power if he has lost, but look what happened in the Gore v Bush election. The conservative majority in effect apointed the unelected Bush President, in what some saw at the time as a judicial coup d'etat.
Breadvan72 said:
A good piece on the career of RBG. There is also a documentary about her, and a Hollywood movie about her early career. My sixteen year old daughter is sad at the passing of one of her feminist icons, but says that RBG remains an inspiration to her.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep...
She sounds rather wonderful. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep...
I think you may be assuming too much consistency of thought or possession of principles amongst members of the Religious Right. They just see Trump as their man, despite his obvious irreligion and his appalling behaviour. Bear in mind that, outside the Metro elites both Left and Right, many Americans are appallingly badly educated, have very narrow Wold views, and have been brainwashed to see politicians as boringly centrist as Biden as agents of Communism.
I add that some (quite a lot) of these people are loonbat extremists who think that the End Times may be upon us, and that Trump may be an agent of the Divine plan to scourge the World with fire, and all that. Q Anon and similar whackjob movements have quite a lot of purchase via social media.
It has been observed that the USA are a democracy despite their electoral system, and not because of it. The role of the Court is a curious one, but it is on one view part of the apparatus of democracy, considered in its widest sense (and not reducing the term democracy to a description of a system of choosing representatives). But, yes, the US Supreme Court has become too political.
Safeguarding the rule of law is one thing that courts do to support democracies. The UK has a weak Constitution because it is only partly written, and has gaps that are filled by Conventions, and it is, as we are seeing at present, vulnerable to abuse by unscrupulous politicians; but the UK judiciary have managed to avoid being politically compromised in the way that the Federal judiciary in the US have been, and have thus far upheld the rule of law.
Thus in that respect at least the UK Constitution is better than the US Constitution (at least unless and until we see political appointments of judges).
Take for example the Miller decisions: these turned on legal principles and not on politics (despite tabloid moans to the contrary), and analysis of decisions in the broad range of judicial review cases shows that the political alignments of Judges have little or no apparent impact on whether the Government of the day wins or loses. That is as it should be.
Safeguarding the rule of law is one thing that courts do to support democracies. The UK has a weak Constitution because it is only partly written, and has gaps that are filled by Conventions, and it is, as we are seeing at present, vulnerable to abuse by unscrupulous politicians; but the UK judiciary have managed to avoid being politically compromised in the way that the Federal judiciary in the US have been, and have thus far upheld the rule of law.
Thus in that respect at least the UK Constitution is better than the US Constitution (at least unless and until we see political appointments of judges).
Take for example the Miller decisions: these turned on legal principles and not on politics (despite tabloid moans to the contrary), and analysis of decisions in the broad range of judicial review cases shows that the political alignments of Judges have little or no apparent impact on whether the Government of the day wins or loses. That is as it should be.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff