158

With the current Supreme Court term coming to an end soon, there is growing speculation that 76-year-old Justice Sam Alito may step down from the seat he has held for 20 years, and that is leading to some under-the-radar maneuvering.

According to the Washington Post, Alito is widely considered the justice [most likely to step down, with observers pointing to his age, the release of his first book, and the November midterm elections as potential motivators due to Republican fears of losing control of the Senate.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

Just for what passes for fun in this hellscape, who would be worse: Justice Eileen Cannon, or Justice Alina Habba?

[-] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I don't know about Cannon, she has enough wit to at least write coherent if corrupt decisions; but at best Alina Habba is a hack with mediocre legal skills who would get eaten for breakfast on the first day. Even the losers on this court are able attorneys, many (most?) with an encyclopedic knowledge of the law or close to it.

Cannon could easily become another Thomas, adequate, with just enough skill to sit there and hold a line for whoever pays him enough. So I'd say get Habba up there, just because I'd like to see her crash and burn, repeatedly shamed by peers with actual legal experience and skill. Trump judges legal acumen with his eyes, but SCOTUS isn't going to give a shit what her legs look like when she can't even turn in a coherent opinion, or worse. If she were to be allowed to throw out dogshit opinions, the court would lose its legitimacy in the eyes of many of the judges across the country who look to it for guidance and decisions. This may already be happening, but an appointment like Habba would speedrun the process.

this post was submitted on 30 May 2026
158 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29941 readers
2074 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS