Dems pushing for Ginsberg to retire from SCOTUS for new Obama pick

[usmarine0352_2005]

.
Well, she's anti-2nd Amendment, so I don't know how much worse it could get, but it can always get worse.




http://www.msnbc.com/the-cycle/scotus-ruth-bader-ginsburg-retirement

.
A case for keeping Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the bench

03/27/14 02:42 PM

By Ari Melber


Some liberals are calling on one of the most respected liberals on the Supreme Court to step down.

That might sound backwards, but that’s the case made by respected legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California at Irvine Law School:

“Only by resigning this summer can [Ginsburg] ensure that a Democratic president will be able to choose a successor who shares her views and values.”

He argues this is the only way to guarantee that President Obama can replace her with another progressive, rather than making the Court play electoral roulette in 2016. And Chemerinsky worries that Democrats could lose the Senate in the midterms and make a lame-duck confirmation of an Obama nominee especially difficult.

The idea has some legs. Jeffrey Toobin, an influential legal expert for The New Yorker, jumped right in, publishing a list of potential replacements for aging members of the Court. But this haste to replace has drawn a useful backlash from many legal experts and liberals.
.

.

 

[vamo]

Not sure what the point of posting this is. Its not like this is anything that you can call your member of congress over. Yeah the supremes are aging, they were aging in 2008 when Obama took office and many were surprised she didn't retire in Obama's first term.

Only thing to do about it now is vote for pro-gun senators in November, and president 2 years later.

 

[19-3Ben]

Only thing to do about it now is vote for pro-gun senators in November, and president 2 years later.

Always a good idea.

 

[DonP]

And there's always the chance they'll tick her off and she'll stay around ... just to teach those "pushy whippersnappers" a lesson.

And then a GOP Senate and WH occupant can choose someone that actually read the Constitution, instead of using it for kindling.

 

[Glocktogo]

Doesn't matter who Obama nominates, they will be worse than Ginsburg. He wouldn't nominatine anything right of a full blown leftist socialist. Meh, it's another opportunity to drag an Obama acolyte through the mud.

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

And there's always the chance they'll tick her off and she'll stay around ... just to teach those "pushy whippersnappers" a lesson.

And then a GOP Senate and WH occupant can choose someone that actually read the Constitution, instead of using it for kindling.

Hopefully this.
.

 

[barnbwt]

Hey, you never know; O's pick could always go all "O'Conner" on him and wind up being a diehard conservative after Scalia takes them shooting . It's not like a whole lot else he's planned has gone "according to plan"

TCB

 

[mrvco]

I can't imagine she is going to like the idea of being discarded. Besides, Bill appointed her and she would probably prefer to be replaced by Hillary than Barry.

 

[Tirod]

What is really being suggested is that after 2016 there will be a Republican president. I has nothing to do with Congress. That is the smoke screen to hide the real fear, and now, they have actually put what they are thinking into print. The Dem's political future apparently got forecast to them at a planning session, so they are stirring the pot to make things happen earlier.

It's a preemptive move based on desperation.

 

[vamo]

What is really being suggested is that after 2016 there will be a Republican president. I has nothing to do with Congress.

Not completely true, nominations require senate approval.

 

[Pilot]

This may backfire on them. While she may believe in most of the Dem platform, she strikes me as a contrarian, and just may dig in her heels, and say "I'll retire when I darn feel like it!"

 

[MtnCreek]

Doesn't matter who Obama nominates, they will be worse than Ginsburg.

I'm having a hard time with this. Not to make a joke, I really do not think it's possible to pick someone worse.

Biggest thing we have to worry about IMHO, is if one of the pro 2A justices has a health issue that requires his replacement.

As far as senate confirmation, most likely they'll only have anti 2A nominees and the senate is still controlled by anti 2A (insert a bad word here).

 

[Hypnogator]

Quote: Doesn't matter who Obama nominates, they will be worse than Ginsburg.

I'm having a hard time with this. Not to make a joke, I really do not think it's possible to pick someone worse.

I agree. Isn't she the one who said that Heller will stand only until some "future wiser Court" overturns it? :banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[Jeff White]

This thread is more about politics then gun rights....