Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#291

Post by User23 »

tyre wrote: post #149
mhh__ wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They do not give a fuck Something that the Democrats need to realize is that they (especially Obama) assumed too much good faith in the congressional GOP. You can stick to your principles while doing it but, when you are against a party who now considers its last nominee (Romney) a radical BLM leftist, when they go low you need to be ready to kick them in the head.

Precisely. There is a desire, specifically and especially on the left, to get so caught up in their principles that people believe it is the primary source of change. For example: What should be the first acts and priorities be of a democratic administration? Healthcare? Nope. Climate change? Nope. A federal holiday for election days? Yes. Passing legislation mandating mail-in ballots? Yes. That’s how you think about…

Democrats’ policy of importing tens of millions of future reliable Democrat voters is some solid strategic thinking.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#292

Post by compscistd »

alex_young wrote: post #122
adzm wrote: post #26

> According to her granddaughter Clara Spera, Ginsburg said, “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/13071014175225610...

There would seem to be precedent for this now. Justice Antonin Scalia died in February of 2016, a replacement was nominated in March of 2016, and because Scalia's seat had become vacant during an election year, the Senate would not even consider a nomination from the president [0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...

I know it doesn't mean much, but I filled out a plea to both my Republican senators and Mitch McConnell's contact forms to respect the McConnell / Merrick Garland precedent in 2016. Obviously they've explicitly said they wouldn't, but it doesn't hurt to try.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#293

Post by cwhiz »

jcalvinowens wrote: post #212
ianai wrote: post #31

I mourn her loss. She’s done more for my life and the average americans life than quite a significant many. Extremism in any shape breeds further extremism. I hope society is about to do a “big blink”. It only takes a majority in the senate and house to add a seat to the SCOTUS or a state to the union.

> It only takes a majority in the senate and house to add a seat to the SCOTUS Exactly. If Biden wins and the senate flips, they'll just add two justices (for 11 total) to get a majority. The right will scream bloody murder, but won't be able to do anything about it.

The Senate doesn’t actually have to vote to confirm a Supreme Court justice.

> and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court

There is nothing except precedent to say the President can’t just directly appoint justices. And then when the appointments are inevitably challenged, who would ultimately rule on it? The Supreme Court. Tah dah. This is how democracy falls apart.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#294

Post by Trasmatta »

refurb wrote: post #270
Trasmatta wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are there two posts right next to each other with the exact same first sentence? > This turn of events means a likely ossification of American policy for a generation. This was also posted by: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24522964

I’m guessing they both read a Vox article that used that word and thought it sounded smart?

Putting aside the "ossification" drop, having the same sentence word for word, posted within a few minutes of each other is weird.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#295

Post by [deleted] »

atonse wrote: post #45
adzm wrote: post #26

> According to her granddaughter Clara Spera, Ginsburg said, “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/13071014175225610...

As much as I respected and admired RBG, even she would’ve known it’s at best a wish and nothing else. If things weren’t so polarized, they absolutely should spare no time in replacing the seat, as is their duty. But we know it’ll be yet another cynical and dishonest process as it was last time.

[deleted]

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#296

Post by roenxi »

systemvoltage wrote: post #255
roenxi wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although the justices being friends is inevitable, it is not desirable. The justices would be more representative of the people - and probably dispense better justice - if there was an uneasy compromise between them based on basic principles of precedent and law. That isn't a very fun vision of life on the bench - and any system is imperfect - so I don't really advocate that. But the idea that these people are assert…

This is the most insane comment I've read in a long time, no offense to you personally. Being friends is orthogonal, and should be orthogonal to one's judgement and their duty as a judge. The entire world would be a better place if they do not follow the argument presented here.

You're not going to like the rest of the American political and justice system. The entire process is based on purposefully creating opposing and disagreeable forces.

The whole thing was clearly created on a principle of opposing friendships between powerful forces.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#297

Post by zanny »

jamiequint wrote: post #207
tyre wrote: post #86

For every one of the coming takes that Republicans will be hypocrites to appoint and confirm a justice (which they will) They do not give a fuck. That’s not how they see power and it is why they have a far disproportionate share of power/representation than their support across the electorate. This is about power. In politics, nothing else matters.

Hillary won the popular vote by 1.1% and currently the Republicans hold a razor thin Senate majority and have been substantially outpaced by Democrats in the House, so I'm not really sure where you get the idea that there's a "far disproportionate share of power/representation". It seems pretty proportionate to me.

Proportionality isn't one to one because half of Americans aren't republican and half aren't democrat. The problem is that polling data is absolutely awful at showing absolute support for the individual parties platforms and membership numbers are largely biased compared to what the electorate actually wants, but there are plenty of articles about GOP tactics to hold power from a minority bloc position.[1]

I wish I bookmarked the statistics on this because they were eye opening to me, but 2016 polls were showing about 40% democrat to 35% republican leaning in the country. So if the public at large is 5% more blue than red, but Republicans hold near-even seats in government, thats a bias in their favor. And as this and many other articles show this isn't the product of random swings of popular support but structurally orchestrated power grabs meant to keep a minority party in power.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/12/gop-man...

Edit: And to be fair the Senate isn't a democratic institution whatsoever to begin with. Its going to naturally lean red because there are many states with low urbanization and population that produce permanent seat Republican senators. Because the distribution of states has nothing to do with the distribution of people that lends the senate to be hugely incongruent with the actual ideological makeup of the populace at large.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#298

Post by refurb »

meundies9 wrote: post #172
AdamJacobMuller wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amy Barrett.

Probably the most realistic choice. She's backed by the Federalist Society, rather than Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz. Plus, she's a woman. She'll get branded as the 'RBG of the right'

I thought that was Sandra Day O’Conner? You know, the first woman on the Supreme Court and nominated by Reagan.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#299

Post by toomim »

gautamcgoel wrote: post #241

This will probably be downvoted, but I think it was incredibly arrogant and selfish of RBG not to retire when Obama was in office so that he could pick her successor. She knew she was getting old and had already had brushes with cancer. If she really cared about feminism and liberalism, why not let Obama appoint a younger justice to the court, someone who would fight for those values for years to come? It's not like…

It's sad to me that people like you think it's more important that your politics are represented in the Supreme Court than that the justices do a good job working together and holding a consistent integral legal standard for the country to follow.

As a fan of the Supreme Court, I think it's one of our least-political institutions. It's certainly the least political branch of government, especially if you compare it to the Legislature (extremely political) and the President (extremely political). It's the only piece of sanity we have left.

And here you call her selfish for not playing politics. Please, consider the value of having a part of government without politics. Consider how rare it is for someone to put other ideals above their political party!

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#300

Post by jcheng »

kwhat4 wrote: post #260

The republicans know how to win, and will do so by any means necessary. The democrats seem happy taking the high road to yet another humiliating defeat. This is why I'm done voting and pretending it makes a difference.

The Democrats have literally lost ONE presidential election in a row
Post reply on HN