Forum Thread

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 6 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    npr.org/2018/12/21/679065534/justice-ru...

    Her health is not doing well and its not looking like she will survive the next two years as a SCJ.

    However, its practically guaranteed that the House will stonewall anybody Trump nominates unless he actually picks someone both parties like. Both the house and senate could jointly agree to list of top 3 that everybody could support, but unlikely Trump would accept anybody that would be a unbiased judge.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The House does not have a say in the approval of the President's Supreme Court nominations. The Senate Judiciary Committee first screens the candidate and if acceptable then puts the name forward to the full Senate. It used to be that the Senate required a 60 vote majority for approval of Supreme Court nominations, but Mitch McConnel changed the rules in April 2017 invoking the "nuclear option" to a simple majority vote. That allowed McConnell to push approval of both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court without the usual pushback of Senate minority party members.

    Not only that, he blocked President Obama's choice of Merrick Garland until after the election, thus giving Republicans a freebee with Trump's election win. Instead of Garland we have Gorsuch.

    If RGB dies in office no matter the date, McConnell will ramrod through another Gorsuch/Kavanaugh/Federalist Society candidate -- even if it happens right before the election or right after the election. He controls the rule making and is absolutely ruthless in this regard.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    The House does not have a say in the approval of the President's Supreme Court nominations. The Senate Judiciary Committee first screens the candidate and if acceptable then puts the name forward to the full Senate. It used to be that the Senate required a 60 vote majority for approval of Supreme Court nominations, but Mitch McConnel changed the rules in April 2017 invoking the "nuclear option" to a simple majority vote. That allowed McConnell to push approval of both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court without the usual pushback of Senate minority party members.

    Not only that, he blocked President Obama's choice of Merrick Garland until after the election, thus giving Republicans a freebee with Trump's election win. Instead of Garland we have Gorsuch.

    If RGB dies in office no matter the date, McConnell will ramrod through another Gorsuch/Kavanaugh/Federalist Society candidate -- even if it happens right before the election or right after the election. He controls the rule making and is absolutely ruthless in this regard.

    Again this shows how outdated our laws and rules are; is McConnell "king"?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    We need a cure for cancer, I have known several people, including my mom who died from it. Instead of spending money on wars and fighting each other, we should be spending money on finding a cure.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Yes my Mom also died of cancer. As we get older, we notice that more and more of our relatives and friends are afflicted with the disease. The baby boomer generation will feel it more as they age past retirement.

    RBG had excellent care to discover and treat her cancer early. Most Americans are not so lucky.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    That's true, by the time they found my mom had it, it was too late, plus there weren't treatments for cancer back then like they have now. If you had cancer in the 1980's or earlier, your chances of surviving were slim to none.