you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] 7 points 2 years ago (7 children)

When was she supposed to retire? Republicans didn't even hold a vote for Merrick Garland under Obama's presidency, so if your answer was during that term, then there'd be no chance she would have been replaced, and she'd be blamed for retiring too early.

Blaming Ginsburg for Republican fuckery is misguided and can only be justified with the benefit of hindsight, which she didn't have at the time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [โ€“] 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    She was supposed to have the foresight to assume that the six months or so when they had a majority (when they passed ACA) was the last time Democrats would have the slightest hope of appointing a new supreme court justice.

    What a fool she was! Not knowing the future!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [โ€“] 3 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    The house does not vote on judges. Only the Senate. Obama had a friendly Senate until Jan 2015. They could even have done it during the lame duck session. But in reality the Senate was widely forecasted to change control so she could have retired in the spring without controversy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [โ€“] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    But they didn't have the supermajority necessary to overcome a filibuster anymore. Even the cloture rule enacted in 2013 excluded supreme court nominations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment