In particular, Breyer pointed to a comment the late Justice Antonin Scalia once made about his hopes for his successor. “He said, ‘I don’t want somebody appointed who will just reverse everything I’ve done for the last 25 years,’” Breyer said, adding that this will “inevitably be in the psychology” of his decision.
Chop chop, bro.
lol, don’t worry buddy; the 6 psychopaths that you sit with will reverse anything you may have accomplished in the last 25 years, which frankly wasn’t much.
Can’t wait to see the GOP’s argument that the president elected in 2024 should get to choose the next justice.
I don’t think they would argue that if breyer retires, but if alito were in a car wreck or something tomorrow they definitely 100% would do that
Sorry. It’s too close to election to appoint a democratic judge.
I mean they might as well. Would be a good troll honestly.
What does he think his legacy is, elegant dissents?
Bryer retires, feinsfein finally croaks and is replaced by the new republican California governor. Replacement is blocked until 2024 when trump landslides Biden.
In a seriousness republicans would let bryer get replaced. They already have the court locked up for at least a decade, are about to lock up Congress for a decade. No point in pissing off libs and motivating them to vote.
Plus libs have fully accepted the new court, no point in pissing them off again.
Obv the replacement would be a super moderate though
They’d make sure Breyer’s replacement was the most conservative Democrat they could find. And make life hell, and snarl congress for at least 6 months, and demand a shitload of other concessions. Then campaign for 20 years on that one time they were “reasonable”.
And the funny thing is their base will still absolutely HATE them for compromising with the enemy. In a parallel universe the R base will be whining on message boards about how their feckless RINO leadership caved again. Except they’re winning every damn time and don’t even appreciate it.
I wish I were being 100% facetious, but there’s a kernel of seriousness here.
Rank and file republicans have a lower approval of John Roberts than dems do, think Biden is an illegitimate president, and believe the Supreme Court has failed to move to the right as much as it ought to.
Obviously the best play for reps is to buttress the institutional legitimacy of an institution they have a 6-3 stranglehold on for the next decade or so at least, but their lizard brain might succumb to temptation–it always does. The outcome will perhaps be something like what suzzer describes above, which is quite possibly even a worse outcome for dems, since it puts them in the role of arguing for the institutional legitimacy of the court.
Dems seem cursed to always be in the very worst negotiating position imaginable. Begging republicans to let them appoint a conservative dem to their permanent supreme court minority is really on brand.
Why not a Roberts clone? He’s popular with Democrats now.
There’s literally no downside to pissing them off though. What are they going to do? add seats? ignore rulings? Nope they’re gonna piss and moan and then lose elections for the next couple of decades and be unable to do anything even if they wanted to. Plus every once in a while this term there was a 5-4 ruling that slipped through that they hard right guys didn’t like, so why not try to decrease the chances of that ever happening again?
Ok what are your thresholds for homelessness, wealth inequality, and poverty that would qualify it as such? This is the kind of dumbass quibble that only a comfortable member of the posting class would dare to make
So this Texas abortion law looks really bad and there’s an outside chance scotus just lets it sail through with no hearing.
Law goes into effect Wednesday morning and scotus won’t act on it until tomorrow evening, if at all. Lower courts could stop it, but it’s not clear they will. A lot of moving parts in the next 36 hours.
Here’s a question for the lawbros:
It sounds like all these challenges to Roe basically involve individual states outlawing abortion. Are there any cases where someone is trying to force a state that has no intention of making abortion illegal (e.g. California), into disallowing abortions? If that was someone’s goal, how might they act upon it.
I don’t think they want to do either of those things? The ballgame for rich conservative lawmakers is to impose draconian restrictions in their own states that don’t technically outlaw abortions and thus force SCOTUS to repeal Roe outright while they let all-but-bans skate through review, and then they can still send their mistresses to California to handle their shenanigans.
Exactly, in an absolute worst case scenario it goes back to being strictly a states’ rights thing and you have a patchwork of legal states, legal with massive hoops to jump through (like a ton of the red states now), and completely illegal (probably with the very worst states trying to float the death penalty as a possibility).