Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies at 87

Options
  • 19-09-2020 12:44am
    #1
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭


    She has succumb to complication from her cancer.

    https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/supreme-court-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-dies-at-87/?fbclid=IwAR3Oq5YIyds3qjfJEtz9RkaIA6nwdXV9m1NBDTItVnPtfJGQuslmaGXjGuM

    This will have immediate ramifications in all ongoing cases before the Supreme Court of the United States, including an appeal the WH just filed today to try and keep immigrants out of the Census (which is against the 14th amendment as written). Trump has already published a list of potential nominees which includes Ted Cruz. Republicans have previously vowed they would nominate a justice in an election year, despite having previously to that left a vacancy open for nearly a year to prevent President Obama from getting Merrick Garland on the bench, citing refusal to do so in an election year.


«134567…18

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    bobbyy gee
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,306 ✭✭✭bobbyy gee


    she tried to survive until trump got voted out of office and worked while fighting cancer


  • Options
    #3
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    yes just heard this via lbc radio.
    terbulent times ahead indeed.
    rip.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #4
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Sad day for the U.S.


  • Options
    #5
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    thats the US ****ed

    Obama's greatest failure was not getting two supreme court judges installed in his tenure


  • Options
    #6
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    thats the US ****ed

    Obama's greatest failure was not getting two supreme court judges installed in his tenure

    It’s been the GOPs single greatest drive. I broke down the justice appointments over the years, back when Garland was nominated: had Obama confirmed him it would have been the first time in decades conservative justices were not the majority opinion on the court. If the Senate confirms a 3rd one now the ideological balance will be 6-3. They’ve cashed in a lot of dignities to make that happen.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,511 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Just looking through Twitter on both sides of the political divide in the US and to a person they are praising RBG regardless of politics.


  • Options
    #8
    touts
    Registered Users Posts: 6,437 ✭✭✭touts


    RIP RBG. A true trailblazer and champion of equal rights.



    Rudy Giuliani probably fancies the job.


  • Options
    #9
    rosser44
    Registered Users Posts: 571 ✭✭✭rosser44


    Setting up a fresh AC to take the piss out of a dead 87 Yr old woman is pathetic and the actions of a f**king coward.


  • Options
    #10
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Just looking through Twitter on both sides of the political divide in the US and to a person they are praising RBG regardless of politics.

    Let's check that landscape again in 12 hours.

    I think confirming a 6-3 conservative majority on the SCOTUS would be worth it to the GOP to completely blow this election. But the calculus there is if Democrats got a majority of both chambers and the presidency they can sign in a new law to change the size of the bench and then confirm more. They could bet the farm though and bank on there not being enough popular support to increase the size of the court, or bank on Democrats not winning those majorities in this election.


  • Options
    #11
    touts
    Registered Users Posts: 6,437 ✭✭✭touts


    Overheal wrote: »
    Let's check that landscape again in 12 hours.

    I think confirming a 6-3 conservative majority on the SCOTUS would be worth it to the GOP to completely blow this election. But the calculus there is if Democrats got a majority of both chambers and the presidency they can sign in a new law to change the size of the bench and then confirm more. They could bet the farm though and bank on there not being enough popular support to increase the size of the court, or bank on Democrats not winning those majorities in this election.

    How many Republican senators and congressmen do you think are such true believers to the conservative cause that they will lay their seats down just to put a GOP member on the Supreme Court.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    touts wrote: »
    How many Republican senators and congressmen do you think are such true believers to the conservative cause that they will lay their seats down just to put a GOP member on the Supreme Court.

    50 of them, at least. 50 of them voted against properly examining and cross-examining evidence and witness at Trump's impeachment trial, under the auspice that, because it's an election year, we shouldn't impeach the President for trying to have a foreign leader interfere in an election on his behalf. Knowing that if they had actually adhered to their own sense of law and order he should be gone, the thinking was: it would be political suicide for them and they would lose their ability to keep the Presidency (no way Pence would win at the head of a ticket) with no certainty that a seat would open up this year. It's always been about the bench, it's what the 2016 election was all about and why they held Scalia's seat open for 11 months. Most conservatives and their voters' agenda, for as long back as I can remember, is to install a majority in the SCOTUS that would align with their agenda, with overturning Roe v Wade at its apex.


  • Options
    #13
    touts
    Registered Users Posts: 6,437 ✭✭✭touts


    Overheal wrote: »
    50 of them, at least. 50 of them voted against properly examining and cross-examining evidence and witness at Trump's impeachment trial, under the auspice that, because it's an election year, we shouldn't impeach the President for trying to have a foreign leader interfere in an election on his behalf. Knowing that if they had actually adhered to their own sense of law and order he should be gone, the thinking was: it would be political suicide for them and they would lose their ability to keep the Presidency (no way Pence would win at the head of a ticket) with no certainty that a seat would open up this year. It's always been about the bench, it's what the 2016 election was all about and why they held Scalia's seat open for 11 months. Most conservatives and their voters' agenda, for as long back as I can remember, is to install a majority in the SCOTUS that would align with their agenda, with overturning Roe v Wade at its apex.

    Losing a multi-million dollar job tends to focus minds a bit.


  • Options
    #14
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    touts wrote: »
    Losing a multi-million dollar job tends to focus minds a bit.

    Who had such a job in this scenario?

    If you're talking about Trump remember he has made no divestment of his businesses and his children run the show by proxy, flying around the world with the secret service on my dime. So, he still has whatever job he had before he ran for office, in effect.

    The most sensible play is for Republicans to wait until November and see what happens with the election. If they lose, they will rush a nominee in and ask Clarence Thomas to also step down for good measure. How they handled the governorship in Wisconsin gave us a hint into that: when they lost the office, they used the lame duck session to rush through laws that usurped power from the office and gave it to the legislature, which they still controlled.

    Either way if they try such distasteful maneuvers you can expect more than a million man march on Washington and I suspect it will make the crowds who showed up for BLM look like a family gathering by contrast of scale. I'd think they'd want to treat the vacancy softly to navigate the public reaction.

    edit: and if you mean any of the Senators, trust me anyone who has held a seat in Congress is set for life, and will always have offers to sit on the board of such and such company that they've already done countless billions of dollars in legislative favors for.


  • Options
    #15
    SchrodingersCat
    Registered Users Posts: 752 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed."

    Let's see how much the GOP respect these wishes.


  • Options
    #16
    ceadaoin.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,116 ✭✭✭ceadaoin.


    SchrodingersCat wrote: »
    Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed."

    Let's see how much the GOP respect these wishes.

    They won't. Has trump even said anything yet? I dont think so.


  • Options
    #17
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    They won't. Has trump even said anything yet? I dont think so.

    He's hosting a rally, so I'm not entirely sure he's gotten the news just yet. Which... is kinda bad, thinking your President is one of the last people to find out about something like that.


  • Options
    #18
    SchrodingersCat
    Registered Users Posts: 752 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    ceadaoin. wrote: »
    They won't. Has trump even said anything yet? I dont think so.

    Yes, they won't. The hypocrisy is depressing.

    In 2019 Senator McConnell stated that he would confirm a new Supreme Court Justice during an election year. Furthermore, earlier this year Senator McConnell reaffirmed his position that he would confirm a Justice in 2020.[1]

    However, in 2016 McConnell vehemently denied President Obama's Supreme Court nominee claiming the Senate couldn't appoint a new Justice during an election year. Senator McConnell later stated that stonewalling President Obama's nominee for many months was one of his proudest moments in his life.

    In 2016, he left a vacant Supreme Court seat open until after a Republican won the White House so that his party could fill it. In 2020, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is willing to do the opposite.

    "Oh, we’d fill it,” McConnell told supporters in Kentucky on Tuesday when asked what he would do if a Supreme Court justice died in 2020 while President Trump was still in office, as CNN reported.


  • Options
    #19
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    And there's the first shot of the civil war.

    EiPSLuLXkAAhfoq?format=png&name=large


  • Options
    #20
    The Floyd p
    Registered Users Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭The Floyd p


    Overheal wrote: »
    And there's the first shot of the civil war.

    EiPSLuLXkAAhfoq?format=png&name=large

    He's an absolute cretin.


  • Options
    #21
    rosser44
    Registered Users Posts: 571 ✭✭✭rosser44


    coinop wrote: »
    You scold others posters for rejoicing in this woman's death but how many millions of dead babies is she responsible for? Abortion is murder. NO PEACE FOR THE WICKED. Proverb 11:10 When it goes well with the righteous, the city rejoices; And when the wicked perish, there is jubilation.

    "You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your kinsfolk. Love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD." - Leviticus 19:18


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Rjd2
    Registered Users Posts: 12,016 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    Should have been replaced years ago and would not have the upcoming disaster that will be Barrett fight to get on the supreme court.


  • Options
    #23
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The ghouls can't wait more than 2 hours since her passing to get another shot at Roe v Wade

    https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1307109144932102146?s=20


  • Options
    #24
    sabat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭sabat


    SchrodingersCat wrote: »
    Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed."

    Let's see how much the GOP respect these wishes.

    "Respect her wishes" will you give over. It's not like asking for her ashes to be scattered in the ocean.


  • Options
    #25
    Spleodar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 72 ✭✭Spleodar


    It’s crazy when you think about it. In Europe we are freaking out because of Poland’s government political interference in the independence of their judiciary. Meanwhile in the “greatest democracy in the world” (if measured by hubris and average waist size) they see stacking the Supreme Court with political stooges assumed to make biased, politically inspired decisions as something that’s just normal. It’s mind boggling and a very low standard.

    RIP Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg. She seemed like a very decent and intelligent lady with an outstanding career in law and on the bench.


  • Options
    #26
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    coinop wrote: »
    One third of this country voted no to abortion. If the same referendum was held today, I'm sure the no vote would be even higher. The public were told it would only be a few hundred abortions per year. Abortion was a last resort. We were duped. 6,666. The devil's number. I have no tears left for Ginsburg. I've cried for too long for the souls who didn't even get a chance at life.

    Source.

    Its irrelevant how many there are. Are you suggesting its only a good or bad thing based on volume?
    Your superstitious 'reasoning' is concerning.
    As the man said, when these 'saved' souls are growing up dependent on the state they aren't so precious are they?


  • Options
    #27
    coinop
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 315 ✭✭coinop


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    You're forgetting an important point. Religion is made up nonsense.

    Funny how you only say that to Christians but revere Muslims as sophisticated women-stoning, homo-hanging, child-marrying, science-denying intellectuals. Unless you can link to where you've criticized Islam in the past?


  • Options
    #28
    Smegging hell
    Registered Users Posts: 460 ✭✭Smegging hell


    coinop wrote: »
    One third of this country voted no to abortion. If the same referendum was held today, I'm sure the no vote would be even higher. The public were told it would only be a few hundred abortions per year. Abortion was a last resort. We were duped. 6,666. The devil's number. I have no tears left for Ginsburg. I've cried for too long for the souls who didn't even get a chance at life.

    Source.


    It's unfortunate you don't have tears for the soul for St Oscar Romero, when you label a 'hero' a man who gloated about his death at the hands of far-right terrorists.


    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114638515&postcount=23


  • Options
    #29
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,826 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The Floyd p wrote: »
    He's an absolute cretin.

    Upon seeing that I donated $100 to his opponent. Which frankly is slightly more than I've donated to Biden and Jaime Harrison combined.


  • Options
    #30
    The Floyd p
    Registered Users Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭The Floyd p


    Overheal wrote: »
    Upon seeing that I donated $100 to his opponent. Which frankly is slightly more than I've donated to Biden and Jaime Harrison combined.

    He's every bit as bad as Trump. I don't want to politicise her death, but it's a shame she didn't make it to past the election. The talk was if her health hadn't gone downhill, the GOP would have put serious pressure on her to retire to clear the space, now they don't even have to.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,244 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Overheal wrote: »
    And there's the first shot of the civil war.

    EiPSLuLXkAAhfoq?format=png&name=large

    My level of surprise is somewhere on the approximation of 'zero'.

    Not that I think for one moment the Democrats would be any more honorable in this situation. SCOTUS appointments have been political for a a couple of decades now. The days of Clinton getting someone in at 96-3 (Ginsburg) or Bush Senior getting someone in at 90-9 (Souter) are long gone.


Advertisement