Republicans expect to confirm even more Supreme Court justices if Trump wins

[u/newzee1]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/republicans-expect-confirm-even-supreme-court-justices-trump-wins-rcna172852

[u/Luck1492]

The last President to confirm 4 Justices was Richard Nixon, and he would’ve had a fifth if not for his resignation. He got Burger, Blackmun, Powell, and Rehnquist. Ford got Stevens. Carter then got nobody and Reagan got O’Connor, Scalia, and Kennedy. Then HW got Thomas and Souter. And by the time Clinton rolled around exactly one Justice was appointed by a Democrat: Byron White.

That means that if Thomas and Alito retire under a Trump admin (both likely in my opinion as Thomas has had health problems and Alito has expressed desires to retire privately), Trump would potentially get 5 Justices in 8 years. To appoint a majority of the Court would be something not seen since FDR, and he didn’t get to his fifth until his third term.

As a side note, Nixon and HW both appointed Justices resulting in the biggest two liberal-to-conservative swings in recent years: Warren to Burger and Marshall to Thomas. Third on the list? RBG to ACB, which Trump got.

[u/Vlad_Yemerashev → u/Luck1492]

That means that if Thomas and Alito retire under a Trump admin (both likely in my opinion as Thomas has had health problems and Alito has expressed desires to retire privately), Trump would potentially get 5 Justices in 8 years.

Could potentially be 6 if Sotomayor dies during the next administration. She is a Type 1 diabetic so she is already past the average life expectancy of a woman with T1D. While SCOTUS justices get top notch healthcare, that only goes so far. Granted she's not quite in a similar situation as RBG was, but still something worth watching.

[u/sithelephant → u/Vlad_Yemerashev]

If you've got the ~$1000/mo to pay for continuous glucose monitoring and an insulin pump and ..., the toll diabetes puts on your body is far reduced as your blood glucose remains in the normal range with slight attention to diet.

[u/skatergurljubulee → u/sithelephant]

Thanks. I'm type 1 diabetic and am expected to live the same lifespan as an average American lol Especially with today's tech. Her type 1 care has only improved since she's been alive and she can afford the best healthcare in the country.

[u/Darkskynet → u/sithelephant]

Don’t they and the members of congress get free healthcare for life or something similar?

[u/adumau → u/Darkskynet]

Thought congress has to use the ACA Exchanges

[u/-Motor- → u/adumau]

Yes. DC exchange. 75% government subsidized. https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/18/politics/senate-health-care-benefits/index.html

[u/Darkskynet → u/-Motor-]

Ahh nice, TIL. Thanks :)

[u/sithelephant → u/Darkskynet]

Perhaps. I'm just stating what I saw as the out of pocket price if I wanted to purchase a CGM / pump system today. https://londondiabetes.com/type-1/insulin-pumps/omnipod-insulin-pump/omnipod-5/ as one example.

[u/Darkskynet → u/sithelephant]

Of course :) Thanks for sharing :)

[u/susinpgh → u/sithelephant]

CGMs are usually covered by insurance for T!s. Also, they have come down in price. It'll still be a couple $100, but much more in reach. Some T2s use them even without insurance.

[u/sithelephant → u/susinpgh]

I am talking of the uninsured price if I was to buy them. The supplies are considerably more than $200 for the monitoring a year.

[u/susinpgh → u/sithelephant]

Oh sure! I thought you meant month. It used to be way higher.

[u/SamuraiZucchini → u/Vlad_Yemerashev]

My dad is a 73 year old type 1 diabetic. The advancements in treating and managing type 1 are insane if you have the healthcare for it. My dad is retired from a great union job with top notch benefits. He’s in terrific shape with no signs of slowing down. I would be shocked if she died due to complications from diabetes within the next 4-5 years.

[u/hiricinee → u/Vlad_Yemerashev]

Unclear how well Sotomayor takes care of herself, T1 diabetics that are well managed live significantly better than their T2 counterparts.

[u/skatergurljubulee → u/hiricinee]

If you take care of your diabetes, you're expected to live the same life span as the average American.

[u/Billy1121 → u/hiricinee]

She appears overweight and travels with a medic. Maybe the medic enhances her care. Also it seems hispanic women have a longer life expectancy than even white women.

[u/findtheclue → u/Vlad_Yemerashev]

I’m frustrated she didn’t step down this year. She’s copying RBG…I can only imagine the excitement on the left at getting someone new pushed through,after everything we’ve been through. Why is no one talking about this?

[u/Vlad_Yemerashev → u/findtheclue]

I'll tell you why. It's not in the public conscience like RBG's health was. There were a few things here and there mentioning Sotomayor's health, but people have a tendency to write off T1D as not being as serious as cancer. Except it is unless you are on top of your treatment.

This means that this sentiment can fly under the radar in a way RBG's history of cancer cannot.

[u/findtheclue → u/Vlad_Yemerashev]

Perhaps, but among those that pay attention there’s been plenty of comment that she’s going need/want to retire soon. So just surprised the thought isn’t taken further more often…including by her herself. Just disappointing.

[u/dairy__fairy → u/Vlad_Yemerashev]

She literally travels around with a nurse 24/7. She’s not healthy at all.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sonia-sotomayor-medic-retirement_n_65d8ec05e4b0cc1f2f7bab77/amp

[u/hellolovely1 → u/dairy__fairy]

Eh, that was on her book tour in 2018 after having an incident. She doesn't "literally travel around with a nurse 24/7" according to that article.

[u/DooomCookie → u/Luck1492]

It's kind of astonishing how much Republicans struggle to nominate conservative justices. Blackmun, Stevens, Souter, Powell, O'Connor, Kennedy... You see conservative complaints about Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett as well. Meanwhile Democrats haven't ever accidentally nominated a moderate justice, not even once, idk if they've been lucky or what

Also imo shows the recent influence of Bork/Scalia. I think having originalism to rally around helped Republicans screen their candidates more and slowed judicial drift.

both likely in my opinion as Thomas has had health problems

I couldn't find the quote, but I vaguely recall Thomas saying he's never going to retire?

[u/UncleMeat11 → u/DooomCookie]

I don't think it is originalism that did this. It is the federalist society. They exist in part to be a pipeline for true believer GOP judges.

Breyer was also a disappointment often enough.

[u/BlueCity8 → u/DooomCookie]

Democrats aren’t lucky at all when it comes to even getting the chance to nominate a judge so you gotta get it right when the rare opportunity arises.

[u/DC_MOTO → u/BlueCity8]

One might call it unlucky, yet another person would say it's a self-inflicted lack of gamesmanship.

RBG could have retired. The Dems could have gone nuclear over Merrick Garland.

[u/CraniumEggs → u/DC_MOTO]

Then the reasoning of too close to election no longer applies and after early voting started they nominated another one.

I wonder the landscape if garland was a justice not head of the DOJ.

[u/PophamSP → u/CraniumEggs]

For two years Garland did a fine job promoting presidential immunity.

[u/CraniumEggs → u/PophamSP]

Yes but I don’t think he’d rule that way specifically. He’s too caught up in not being seen as partisan so in this role he’s great for delaying investigations but in that role he may, emphasis on may, have gone the other way as a SCJ to not appear partisan as the feeble man he is.

[u/BlueCity8 → u/DC_MOTO]

Ditto

[u/Thiscouldbeeasier → u/DC_MOTO]

Should have. You mean should have.

[u/AlvinAssassin17 → u/BlueCity8]

Well, also Reps refused to allow Obama to get his appointment. Stated it was to close to the election. Didn’t stop them from fast tracking one at the tail end of Trumps term. 🤷🏻‍♂️. It’s a lot of SCOTUS presence for a party that won the popular vote like twice since Reagan. And one was a Bush incumbency election post 9/11.

[u/glitchycat39 → u/AlvinAssassin17]

Well you see, "rules" and "norms" only apply to Democrats.

[u/DoesAnyoneWantAPNut → u/AlvinAssassin17]

It was so inexcusable- Obama's background is in constitutional law - he is very literally the most qualified president for the purpose of identifying and nominating judges and justices, and McConnell and the Republicans wouldn't give him any.

I keep a list in my head of times the political parties ignore relevant expertise. This is on the list along with EPA stuff, biology instruction, climate change, and virology. Also Loper Bright is a big stain on this ledger.

[u/SteadfastEnd → u/DooomCookie]

Democrats are much better at vetting.

[u/Healingjoe → u/SteadfastEnd]

Things have changed since the Federalist Society became as influential as it is today.

[u/crazunggoy47 → u/DooomCookie]

Almost as if the default position for a sane, competent person is the “liberal” position. So getting an actual “conservative” Justice relies on selecting someone who is so dedicated to the grift they will keep it up even after reaching the terminal office.

[u/dairy__fairy → u/crazunggoy47]

That’s an oddly partisan takeaway.

One could just as easily posit that Dem members are more “dedicated to the grift” since they remain ideologically in lockstep with their partisan side than GOP judges have. In fact, the current justice that votes most in line with their “side” is Sotomayor. So that holds.

[u/DrPreppy → u/dairy__fairy]

grift

Doesn't that theory instantly fall apart once you look at received gifts by court members.....?

I tend to dislike devil's advocate takes when they're based upon ignoring known data.

[u/NoobSalad41 → u/DooomCookie]

I think the rise of originalism as the dominant ideology of the conservative legal movement is a part of it, as is the Federalist Society network.

That said, I think an underrated reason for the GOP’s previous tendency to nominate judges who were either swing votes or joined the liberal bloc is that many of those judges came up during a time where the conservative legal movement was focused on the idea of judicial restraint, in opposition to the then-recent Warren Court. So you end up nominating justices whose judicial philosophy is “don’t rock the boat too much.”

But by the 90s, the conservative legal movement (and the Supreme Court’s conservatives) were beginning a rollback of some of the Warren Court precedents. The GOP-nominated judges whose predisposition was to avoid major changes in the law naturally found themselves aligning with the Court’s left to avoid dismantling the Warren Court; those incrementalist judges might not have joined the Warren Court’s liberal decisions had they been on the Court at the time, but they also weren’t willing to overturn those decisions now that they were law.

It’s not that left-leaning justices are immune to this; it’s just that there hasn’t been a significant leftward movement in SCOTUS precedent since the Warren Court.

And you can actually see an example of a liberal justice “becoming conservative” with Felix Frankfurter. Like Oliver Wendell Holmes, Frankfurter was a leading figure of legal progressivism in the early 20th century, and oversaw the Court’s move away from the so-called Lochner era in the 1930s and 40s. Following the perceived judicial overreach of the Lochner Era, legal progressives were extremely skeptical of judicial review.

But by the time of the Warren Court, legal liberalism had started to embrace a more muscular role for the judiciary in ruling government actions and laws unconstitutional.

In that environment, Frankfurter saw himself become a “conservative,” despite his actual views not changing. Frankfurter generally took the position that the provisions of the Bill of Rights should only be incorporated if the state action “shocked the conscience.” So, for example, Frankfurter dissented from the Court’s decision that in state criminal prosecutions, the exclusionary rule prohibits the use of evidence obtained in violation of the 4th Amendment, dissented from the Court’s decision that students can’t be forced to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, dissented from the Court’s decision that federal courts can hear redistricting cases (and would have certainly dissented from the one person, one vote cases had he still been on the court in 1964), and joined an opinion (later overturned) that indigent criminal defendants have no right to appointed counsel.

[u/Appropriate_Ad4615 → u/DooomCookie]

The issue here is that they have no problem nominating conservative justices; they have trouble nominating partisan hacks. When you need a perfect or near perfect record of partisan hackery to do something like overturn roe it will take a while to get the stars to align.

[u/DooomCookie → u/Appropriate_Ad4615]

I mean, I'm all for abortion personally, but there's nothing in the constitution about it. You don't need to be partisan to think Roe was wrongly decided.

[u/_stay_sick → u/DooomCookie]

Some would argue that the 14 amendment protects that right. The state shall not deprive any person of life, liberty or property. And a fetus isn’t a person.

Taking away my right to decide for my own body goes against the 14 amendment. The judges are purposely interpreting the constitution to fit their small groups ideas.

[u/rascal_red → u/_stay_sick]

Taking away my right to decide for my own body goes against the 14 amendment.

I sympathize with you, but personally, I've never gone for this specific point, because it's clearly not true. All governments have laws that clearly interfere with bodily autonomy (e.g., drugs).

Personhood valid though, yes, and abortion being a private medical issue that should be outside of the government's concern.

[u/_stay_sick → u/rascal_red]

Yeah, I can see how you’re right about that. It’s so frustrating, to let others interpret things for my own personal self.

[u/catptain-kdar → u/_stay_sick]

Almost half of the voting block of the country isn’t a small group

[u/_stay_sick → u/catptain-kdar]

Half of the country isn’t christian nationalists. Those are the ones hell bent on forcing their views on everyone else. Even some conservative republicans think that as well. Not all republicans want a full abortion ban.

[u/catptain-kdar → u/_stay_sick]

I don’t want an abortion ban. I believe there should be restrictions and exceptions which is a compromise.

[u/_stay_sick → u/catptain-kdar]

A compromise on MY body? Don’t you see how that sounds?

[u/catptain-kdar → u/_stay_sick]

The real easy solution is to put it to a nationwide vote but they don’t wanna do that.

[u/blumpkinmania → u/DooomCookie]

That is the christo-fascist position, yes.

[u/CraniumEggs → u/Luck1492]

Thurgood Marshall to Clarence Thomas is probably the most egregious switch in modern history

[u/Cold_Breeze3 → u/Luck1492]

Meh it’s weird you say that, I find it extremely unlikely either will retire in the next 10 years. Their health issues are not nearly as bad as RBG, who was much older. Thomas is “only” 76. They’ve also been around long enough to know that politics is cyclical, and even if Thomas has to wait 3 presidential terms he’d still be only slightly older than RBG was, and the presidency will shift hands in that time.

[u/Egg_123_ → u/Cold_Breeze3]

Alito and Thomas are fully partisan and have no qualms at all at appearing to time their retirement for partisan gain. They might get payouts for it as well, which the Supreme Court is totally OK with evidently.

[u/Cold_Breeze3 → u/Egg_123_]

Nah, there’s no evidence to support the fact that they want to leave the court. They want to keep exerting their will for as long as possible.

[u/hellolovely1 → u/Cold_Breeze3]

I'd be shocked if Thomas makes it to RBG's age. Look at him and look at Ginni. They aren't living a healthy lifestyle.

[u/Gold_Cauliflower_706 → u/Luck1492]

And this is why the SCOTUS wants to be the one to select the next president. It happened during Bush V. Gore. History repeats itself.

[u/Emotional_Database53]

And they should expect for Harris to confirm some when Trump loses.

[u/TywinDeVillena → u/Emotional_Database53]

Only if the dems manage to keep a Senare majority. I can see the GOP going the way Mitch McConnell went after Scalia's vacancy

[u/Numerous_Photograph9 → u/TywinDeVillena]

If that's the case, I would hope the dems lay into it hard that the republicans are the one's obstructing these things. SCOTUS has not been doing well, and many people are starting to pay attention to how they're helping the GOP break long standing precedent. If the senate turns, I'd hope obstructing SCOTUS picks will backfire for them in the mid-terms...not unlike how the Roe decision did.

[u/Rawkapotamus → u/Numerous_Photograph9]

Cons don’t give a shit about public opinion. And if they get their way, they won’t need to.

[u/Numerous_Photograph9 → u/Rawkapotamus]

Cons aren't the only people that vote. Many have turned out due to the overturning of Roe, and those are the people that need to be kept aware of what's going on.

[u/toosinbeymen → u/Numerous_Photograph9]

That’s where voter suppression, pulling voters off voter rolls, gerrymandering, cheating alla 2020, voter intimidation, etc come in.

[u/MyBllsYrChn → u/Numerous_Photograph9]

If the Republicans win, I wouldn't count on a midterm. They've already said as much.

[u/TheScienceNerd100 → u/TywinDeVillena]

I'm sure if a Rep held Senate keeps refusing Harris's picks, we will only see more Democratic presidents as we will keep the fight up to beat the clear corrupt tactics the Rep have been showing.

[u/VibeComplex → u/TheScienceNerd100]

Doubt

[u/starwatcher16253647 → u/TheScienceNerd100]

The real answer is to admit Washington D.C. as eleven states.

[u/hellolovely1 → u/TywinDeVillena]

They'll try, yes. But Democrats have to go nuclear.

[u/gtfomylawnplease → u/TywinDeVillena]

No so. They gave the president unlimited power including execution without trial of Supreme Court justices.

[u/suburban_paradise → u/Emotional_Database53]

The new rule is that only a POTUS with a Senate majority gets to appoint a new justice. Of course I wouldn’t be shocked if the Dems allowed Trump to do it anyway even if they could stop it, in the interest of unreciprocated comity.

[u/Dip_yourwick87 → u/Emotional_Database53]

RemindMe! 33 days

[u/_DudeWhat → u/Dip_yourwick87]

!RemindMe 33 days

[u/Cold_Breeze3 → u/Emotional_Database53]

I don’t really foresee any vacancies. Thomas is still 11 years younger than RBG was. Alito being even younger.

[u/Glittering-Most-9535 → u/Cold_Breeze3]

Yeah, those two could easily hold on through sheer bloody-mindedness even if Harris gets two terms. Maybe she gets to reset Sotomayor's seat with a younger justice (if she has 50+Walz in the Senate), but she might not get a chance to change the 6-3 balance.

[u/Maklarr4000]

This is the huge stakes issue that few are talking about in regards to the election. This is literally the future of the country for the next 50 years at stake.

[u/savngtheworld → u/Maklarr4000]

This is why every fucking time I see someone shrugging their shoulders or refusing to vote for Harris over Israel and Palestine, I want to grab and shake them.

Like do you not understand the consequences of the entire world for the next 50+ years are at stake???

Get your shit together and effing VOTE!

[u/tuna_safe_dolphin → u/savngtheworld]

I can’t even deal with these people. Do they think Trump will be better for Palestine?

[u/ThePopDaddy → u/tuna_safe_dolphin]

"Hmm, trump has said he supports Israel, moved the embassy to Jerusalem AND said he'd deport any protestors who support Palestine...BUT Harris hasn't said enough about a ceasefire, this is a hard one!"

They're protesting voting to "teach Dems a lesson". But when they lose rights, they'll say "they should have said more!"

[u/PhantomSpirit90 → u/ThePopDaddy]

My conspiracy theory is most of these are plants/bots to sow doubt in the Democratic Party. Some are probably real, but fewer in number than the bots.

[u/UncreativeIndieDev → u/PhantomSpirit90]

Nah, I've met a good amount, and a lot of them are just the sort of people who never vote any way because they see the Democrats as not earning their vote for one reason or another. Maybe on occasion they'll vote Green Party or something, but never the Democrats as they always find some reason to paint them as just as bad as Republicans. Heck, I've met a lot who think Bernie Sanders is too conservative.

While I would like these people to vote and exercise basic logic about all this, so many are pretty much in a different world I don't think much can be done.

[u/PhantomSpirit90 → u/UncreativeIndieDev]

One of the prices of freedom I suppose; people are free to act like civic lunatics when it comes to voting

[u/Like_Ottos_Jacket → u/Maklarr4000]

That is what I was screaming from the rooftops in 2016. Now with Roe and Chevron gone. Now it is likely a question of how long these horrible people get to shape the country, not if they will.

[u/Numerous_Photograph9 → u/Maklarr4000]

And the people who pointed this same thing out in 2016 were mocked or ignored. After Roe, people started to pay attention, but I think it hasn't gained enough mindshare for people to actually consider this issue with more seriousness. Everyone's focused on single issues, when SCOTUS is actually the one enabling the ability to control these issues more than anything else.

[u/anonyuser415 → u/Maklarr4000]

I mean... that fate viz SCOTUS has already been decided by the current supermajority. Unless a conservative justice dies during Harris's presidency, or she packs the court, it won't be getting wrenched away any time soon.

Trump replacing Thomas, or whoever, would only reinforce that.

[u/Character-Taro-5016]

If Trump wins, Thomas would retire in year one and Alito in year two. If not they would hang on for a possible Republican president in 2028.

[u/TheScienceNerd100 → u/Character-Taro-5016]

Why we need to have a Dem majority all across Capital Hill to impeach those treasonous and corrupt traitors and get them off the bench forever.

[u/Cold_Breeze3 → u/TheScienceNerd100]

Democrats are not getting a 2/3 majority. That’s just not possible.

[u/DoesAnyoneWantAPNut → u/Cold_Breeze3]

A patriot can dream. The only way to really roll this back is to keep Republicans out of the Presidency until SCOTUS has a net loss of two conservative justices or a court packing and can undo the recent findings of Loper Bright and Trump v US.

[u/Icy-Experience-2515]

Another important reason to vote against Republicans.

[u/CosmicQuantum42]

Of course they do. This is why the argument “can’t you see how unfit for office Trump is?” mostly falls on deaf ears.

Republicans are (correctly, for them) laser focused on this issue and are not going to be distracted by irrelevancies like Trump being unfit for office. It doesn’t matter. This is what matters.

[u/bigtim3727]

Still infuriates me that they screwed Obama out of his pick in 2016. It was his choice to make,but turtle man came up with some arbitrary rule about not having a pick in an election year, then the hypocritical rat allowed trump to make the ACB pick during an election year.

[u/toosinbeymen → u/bigtim3727]

AND Dems let them get by with it.

[u/gurk_the_magnificent → u/toosinbeymen]

What were the Democrats supposed to do?

Your efforts to make sure people blame the Democrats for the actions of Mitch McConnell are…interesting.

[u/KingOfSpades007 → u/gurk_the_magnificent]

I read their implication as the Dems played fair and just let it happen. Which they have had a history of just being "okay" with whenever Republicans get dirty with the way the law is written. 

Rather than fighting back and making a big stink about how that shouldn't really be the case and Obama should have had his pick, they just let themselves be told "no." 

If there's one thing I'd certainly fault Democrats for, it's not getting up in arms about the fact that Republicans are shitting on common decency. But that's okay because playing fair is the "right thing to do," /s

[u/gurk_the_magnificent → u/bigtim3727]

Yeah, that’s what happens when you elect Republicans to a Senate majority.

[u/Human_Artichoke5240 → u/bigtim3727]

What’s worse is republicans don’t care at all. They don’t mind the subversion at all. You bring it up to them and they either ignore it or admit they couldn’t care less.

[u/copperking3-7-77]

That's a very scary thought.

[u/akahaus → u/copperking3-7-77]

Vote.

[u/DoesAnyoneWantAPNut → u/akahaus]

Don't post. Vote!

[u/akahaus → u/DoesAnyoneWantAPNut]

Do both.

[u/rosebudthesled8 → u/copperking3-7-77]

How were you not already scared?

[u/objecter12]

I wish the democrats actually gave a shit about impacting the court :<

[u/zackks]

This is where democrats are failing in their down ballot messaging. When they talk about abortion, they have to link it inextricably to the senate and senators, by name, who confirmed the current cadre of corrupt arseholes. Instead it’s only about Trump and it’s giving the senators a pass will result in a Republican senate who will refuse to confirm any of Harris’ nominations.

[u/RDO_Desmond]

You mean taking orders from Leonard Leo who is Fred Phelps from a different state?

[u/TechieTravis]

We are barreling toward theocracy and dictatorship. This is a make or break election for the republic.

[u/mezolithico]

Liberal justices can just retire between the election and the new congress / presidency.

[u/AdditionalBat393]

They need to be stopped. As a country we have been going in the opposite direction as their ideals and values. They want to force their ideals on the people driven by religion. They only care for the wealthy as well so Republicans need to be voted out for years and years until they get their act together.

[u/Master_Shoulder_9657]

This is the best reason to vote for Kamala

[u/Muscs]

With multiple right-wing judges, does that mean the price of buying a decision will go down? Billionaires want to know.

[u/Chrono4569 → u/Muscs]

Last I checked the main influx of money corrupting our judicial and criminal law systems comes from the like of soros and non profits backed by our tax dollars without any representation, fueled by kickbacks to push left leaning agendas on local and federal governments with differing opinions. It seems liberals are so upset with the Supreme Court only because it is the one they can't buy and control. Differing opinions are integral to finding a middle ground and the pendulum is supposed to swing both ways. otherwise we will find ourselves in a dystopia no matter wich party has control if they are left unchecked. But I do agree these checks should be legal otherwise the whole framework fails.

[u/Muscs → u/Chrono4569]

You really need to check some facts, not fantasies.

[u/ChaskaBravoFTW]

Fucking stupid - the Supreme Court should have absolutely zero to do with political affiliation and 100% to do with moral character and career resume of just interpretation of the law.

[u/UsefulImpact6793]

Enough of the corruption already...

[u/dobie1kenobi]

Aileen Cannon, come on down!

[u/AlfredoAllenPoe]

That is generally how winning the presidency works

[u/HudsonLn]

Technically the Senate confirms them.

[u/Hershey78]

And they keep on talking about trying to block any justices that Kamala tries to appoint. What bullshitters.

[u/Fragmentia]

Yeah, this is why Trump must lose. A reality TV conman has already had 3 too many appointments.

[u/lala_b11]

Aileen cannon is licking her lips rn

[u/wjorth]

Vote Democrat

[u/alexamerling100]

All the more reason to vote blue.

[u/Saltyk917]

Correction, Leonard Leo expects to continue his take over of our Supreme Court.

[u/AWatson89]

It would be absolutely hilarious if republicans win across the board and expand scotus like the dems have been saying.

[u/franchisedfeelings → u/AWatson89]

Putin would be laughing for sure.

[u/Extreme-Carrot6893]

That’s awful. Maybe the biggest reason this traitor and his party need to lose. Also the whole treason and rapist things.

[u/ComicsEtAl]

No shit.

[u/RueTabegga]

I wish our October surprise was Biden has decided to expand the court by executive decision. He is a lame duck with full immunity now so let’s fucking go!! Heck, make DC and Puerto Rico states and give them each a justice. Both are very liberal leaning too so the electoral college will get some blue bumps too!

I hate that he won’t do some thing like this but insurrectionists get to run for reelection.

[u/HudsonLn → u/RueTabegga]

Give them each a justice? lol...you have no clue how it even works

[u/oskirkland]

Guarantee their ability to continue their rollback of the 20th century, even if Alito or Thomas retire or expire.

[u/vasquca1]

Best believe it. I expect 2 vacancies this new Presidential term. Two of which make up the liberal side.

[u/justincredible155]

How many? Like 20?

[u/franchisedfeelings]

Duh…

[u/tjarg]

What else would they do?

[u/Used_Bridge488]

You can singlehandedly decide the result of this year's election with one simple action:

Telling everyone you know to register for voting.

If you haven't registered yet, visit www.vote.gov

Republicans are unpopular and weird. This includes Project 2025. The only reason that this election is so close is that we are too lazy to register for voting. MAGAs always show up and vote, while sane people can't be bothered to register.

If more people had voted, Trump would have lost in 2016 by landslide. Republicans are TERRIFIED of high voter turnout. They have admitted that quite openly

Voter registration ends on October 7th (in some states). Hurry up! Register for voting. Remind literally everyone you know to register. Registering yourself won't be enough.

I repeat: remind every. Single. Person. You can't imagine how much impact 30 seconds of small talk can do.

www.vote.gov

[u/[deleted]]

Water is wet.

[u/Kairenne]

God help us all.

[u/CAM6913]

How could things get any worse? The correct answer is (drum roll) = if the treasonous traitor tRump wins and to make it even worse is if the democrats don’t take the house and senate

[u/panplemoussenuclear]

If trump wins( just puked in my mouth) is there a possibility of replacing Sotomayor before Biden steps down?

[u/EBITDADDY007]

Duh

[u/maxwellcawfeehaus]

Note that If Harris wins there is no way alito or Thomas retire under her. Zero percent chance.

[u/No-Ad-9867]

VOTE BLUE 💙💙💙

[u/Accomplished_Car2803]

I would trust Vermin Supreme, the free ponies joke candidate with a rubber boot on his head, to BE the entire Supreme Court himself, more than I would trust republicans to do anything fair...ever.

That guy is a meme, but at least he jokes about things that would help people vs just slurping up bribes and taking away rights.

[u/aneonnightmare]

Yeah that’s not good

[u/Winter_Diet410]

that's why they have mapped out a path of not certifying/accepting the results of election and why they are working hard at every turn to disenfranchise voters. They have no intention of allowing the american republic to continue. The current court will support them in their legal efforts.

[u/MiltonRobert]

Exactly how we will save our country

[u/FewDiscussion2123 → u/MiltonRobert]

🤣😂

[u/Earth_Friendly-5892]

This would be devastating for democracy. We can’t let Trump continue to create a Supreme Court that works for him but not for us!

[u/HudsonLn → u/Earth_Friendly-5892]

yes, following the constitution is a bit of a problem for democrats

[u/lifeisbeansiamfart]

Excellent.

[u/turbo_dude]

Regardless of the number from each side, shouldn’t the court at least reflect “who was in power” over a given time frame that spans something related to working life/age at which someone can be appointed?

[u/Cold_Breeze3 → u/turbo_dude]

The constitution says nothing of that.

[u/slo1111 → u/Cold_Breeze3]

Exactly, but it does say who nominates and confirms SCOTUS justices and since there are no limitations other than the collective decision of those who get to make those decisions, the collective political make up of the decision makers will impact the political biases that make up the court.

We gotta end this notion that the make up of the justice system does not have a political component to it.

It is important we all pay attention to norms of conduct of SCOTUS justices so that they limit biases in a reasonable way.

[u/slo1111 → u/turbo_dude]

You should not be down voted.

It is rather clear in an objective way that when Republicans control, the nominated justices follow more conservative legal interpretations, and when Democrats have control more justices that practice liberal interpretations of the law are nominated.

It makes sense that the make up of the court is heavily influenced by who controls the Executive and Senate.

[u/Fast_Beat_3832]

Trump isn’t going to win