-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Breaking: Justice Kennedy announces retirement from SCOTUS
- Thread starter infinitys_7th
- Start date
http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/393357-kennedy-announces-retirement-from-supreme-court
I am not convinced this means 20-30 years of conservative majority opinions, simply because anyone can get ill or worse at any time, and even a conservative judge's general outlook on life can evolve over time. But it does suggest we can expect more conservative majority opinions for at least a while now. And if a left leaning justice retires (doubtful) or cannot continue for other reasons, that could lead to a conservative leaning court for years to come.
My views:
1) a conservative leaning court is ok because I am not in favor of judicial legislation.
2) RGB made a huge mistake by not retiring years ago if she hoped to see her outlook become the court's norm in the near future.
3) This is going to cause a lot of heads to explode.
I am not convinced this means 20-30 years of conservative majority opinions, simply because anyone can get ill or worse at any time, and even a conservative judge's general outlook on life can evolve over time. But it does suggest we can expect more conservative majority opinions for at least a while now. And if a left leaning justice retires (doubtful) or cannot continue for other reasons, that could lead to a conservative leaning court for years to come.
My views:
1) a conservative leaning court is ok because I am not in favor of judicial legislation.
2) RGB made a huge mistake by not retiring years ago if she hoped to see her outlook become the court's norm in the near future.
3) This is going to cause a lot of heads to explode.
dolabla
Member
Check Reeeeset, they're having an amazing bitch fit right now
It's always the end of the world
lol just about everything that has permission to notify my phone just notified my phone to tell me about SCOTUS Kennedy's retirement announcement within the last 10 minutes. It's safe to say, yeah.
Last edited:
Captain Zyrain
Member
You should see the reactions online.. whew.
I doubt this will change too much, but it does lock in a conservative voice for a bit longer, especially as Kennedy was getting long in the tooth.
With Scalia and Kennedy.. they'll be replaced by conservative justices. When Stevens and Souter left, they were replaced with new liberal justices.. so the balance hasn't really shifted that much in a while. But you never know, George H.W. Bush nominated Souter.. and he ended up voting liberal most of the time, so you never know what you might get in the end.
I doubt this will change too much, but it does lock in a conservative voice for a bit longer, especially as Kennedy was getting long in the tooth.
With Scalia and Kennedy.. they'll be replaced by conservative justices. When Stevens and Souter left, they were replaced with new liberal justices.. so the balance hasn't really shifted that much in a while. But you never know, George H.W. Bush nominated Souter.. and he ended up voting liberal most of the time, so you never know what you might get in the end.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Lots of people running around with their hair on fire over this news.
infinitys_7th
Member
I think you overestimate the power of social conservatives right now.
That said, I do hope this paves the way for challenges to affirmative action policies, which Kennedy protected.
Fox Mulder
Member
I'm sure people are going to cry like babies in certain places about moving to another country to evade the concentration camps, but it's still going to be a 5-4 court. The republicans just managed to refresh the seats held by Scalia and Kennedy.
This will be filled well before midterms and Dems can't hold it up like the GOP did.
This will be filled well before midterms and Dems can't hold it up like the GOP did.
Super Mario
Banned
He was the most centralized, sitting, justice. This will continue to push the court Right.
It was very stupid of Democrats to not make RBG retire when they had the chance. If there is 6 more years of Trump, is she going to be able to hold that job into her 90s? If Trump gets to appoint her replacement, that will be the most glorious, monumental, blow to Liberals.
It will come. Mark these words.
It was very stupid of Democrats to not make RBG retire when they had the chance. If there is 6 more years of Trump, is she going to be able to hold that job into her 90s? If Trump gets to appoint her replacement, that will be the most glorious, monumental, blow to Liberals.
It will come. Mark these words.
Last edited:
TheShadowLord
Member
2. Judging by how McConnell block all of Obama's nominee's when Scalia die, I don't see why it wouldn't happen again if Ruth retired.
Pretty sure you can't make RBG do fuck-all, haha, she's a strong woman.
Captain Zyrain
Member
I think he meant if she retired when they had majorities in congress, when they got Sotomayor and Kagen confirmed.
She
She could have easily been replaced between Nov. 2013 when the DEMS removed the filibuster for regular judicial appointments, and the following November when they lost the senate.
She could have easily been replaced between Nov. 2013 when the DEMS removed the filibuster for regular judicial appointments, and the following November when they lost the senate.
TheShadowLord
Member
I am not sure how that is her fault. I am reading an article from 2013 atm and democrats only change the rule because Republicans used it a couple of times because they wanted to prevent confirmation votes on supreme court judges.
dragonfart28
Banned
People overestimate the power of public opinion over legal decisions.
The truth of the matter is that no matter what the political landscape of the judiciary, people change.
We're always bent toward utilitarian progress because sooner or later, stubbornly antiquated viewpoints tend to fail.
The truth of the matter is that no matter what the political landscape of the judiciary, people change.
We're always bent toward utilitarian progress because sooner or later, stubbornly antiquated viewpoints tend to fail.
I'm not saying she should be faulted. She did nothing wrong by continuing to serve. Just saying that in hindsight, if she now wants a like minded person appointed to replace her, then she should have retired soon after the filibuster was first eroded. If someone was actually "at fault", it is Chucky and his cronies for striking the filibuster for low level appointments. That gave the R's the cover to step it up a notch when they got the chance.
Hamster Plugin
Member
So America just became the first country to reverse the implementation of gay marriage.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Now wait for leftists trying to leave USA (again) to Canada and realize (again) that Canada's laws are stricter than those in USA.
Last edited:
bucyou
Member
Hamster Plugin
Member
Gay marriage was a 5-4 decision, with Kennedy being the only conservative to switch from the partisan stance. Donald Trump picks his replacement, which means the pick will be a hardcore conservative who will vote against the next gay marriage decision, making it 5-4 against.
Super Mario
Banned
I believe the Republicans very easily COULD overturn gay marriage. The question is, do they want to? I don't think Trump would go down that path.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
What's the reason to believe and care about something yet to happen?
Death Dealer
Member
George HW Bush wasn't that conservative. He was known as kind of a Rockefeller Republican before getting picked by Reagan. And he made some pretty anti-conservative statements beforehand, I remember reading he once trashing the National Review as not something he cared about or paid attention to.
There is no lawful way to force a SC to retire. In hindsight, I'm sure RGB regrets not retiring under Obama, but I bet she felt confident Clinton would pick her successor. I've read her health isn't good, so she will have to make quite an effort to outlast Trump. But agreed, if Trump picks her replacement, it would be a huge shift in the ideology of the court. Much moreso than Kennedy's replacement. If Trump wins reelection in 2020, I woudn't doubt if Thomas retires too. So Trump could end up with 3 or more SC picks. I wonder what the record is for the most SC picks. I think FDR had a ton, but he was elected 4 times.
I think even if it was reversed, Congress would pass a law authorizing gay marriage. I think that was the contentious issue with the court's conservatives. They didn't think the SC should effectively create law. But in this day and age, and after having it legal for a while, even most Republicans would vote to legalize gay marriage. I have no doubt Trump would sign that law.
Guileless
Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Roberts will not be the 5th vote to overturn Roe. I'd take that bet any day.
Death Dealer
Member
He seems to take his role as chief justice as a role to mitigate the partisianship of the court. For example, his interpretation of Obamacare as a tax, which was an unpopular decision on the right. And he seems to put a lot of weight on stare decisis. So I agree, I don't see him overturning it.
I applaud the return of gifs in any and all forms. I miss the days of the PS4 horse being stable as ...Roe v. Wade like...
Papa
Banned
She has to be awake to show that strength.
Super Mario
Banned
It's not about using the law to retire. It's a conversation they failed to have. "We appreciate your service. It's time we start thinking about preserving your seat to continue the work you did. Here's what we would like to do, and here is what we will do in your honor."
bucyou
Member
Someone would have to file a lawsuit, go through lower courts, then the plaintiff would have to petition the supreme court to hear the case, and they would have to accept.
Im not directing this at you, but reading some peoples comments online you would think trump tore down the statue of liberty and raped it. I cannot imagine a scenario where a case on gay marriage would make it back to the supreme court, same goes for abortions.
bucyou
Member
agreed. My opinion is the feds have no right to regulate either gay marriage or abortions, that should be up to the states.
Pretty much. All of my liberal friends are going crazy, but I don't think people understand how the supreme court works. Roe V Wade isn't automatically overturned, Gay marriage isn't illegal and slavery isn't coming back tomorrow.
WHat's more likely is decisions like the ones we saw this week will become more common. 5-4 breaking in the "conservative" direction.
Platinumstorm
Member
Personal stance first: While I am quite liberal, I generally prefer a mildly more conservative Supreme Court. I hold the Supreme Court justices to a pretty high standard, and I trust their collective judgement, and that they will make appropriate decisions when necessary. The Chief Justice proves that time and time again, as does Kennedy.
What happens next will be interesting. The hold up on Judge Garland's case was despicable, and the instant counter- "wait for the vote" by Democrats currently is despicable as well, not that you can blame them from a political perspective. We do not want a country where our Supreme Court is represented by high partisans. This is treacherous waters for the president, and he could change the country in very negative ways; not from a judgement or political perspective, but as a foundation for our country.
What happens next will be interesting. The hold up on Judge Garland's case was despicable, and the instant counter- "wait for the vote" by Democrats currently is despicable as well, not that you can blame them from a political perspective. We do not want a country where our Supreme Court is represented by high partisans. This is treacherous waters for the president, and he could change the country in very negative ways; not from a judgement or political perspective, but as a foundation for our country.
Bolivar687
Banned
If you applaud when five unelected judges overturn democratically-enacted abortion restrictions, you have no right to protest when the same venue respects them.
The Constitution is a finite document - it does not and cannot say any more than it already does. And our Constitution is the only reason why the United States avoided the disasters European democracies suffered in the 19th and 20th centuries. If you deeply care about family issues and believe the government can be a responsible engineer for social experimentation, then you should get out there and use the political process to make it happen. By all means, I wish you the best of luck. But you have no right under our federalist framework to subvert the judicial system and impose new laws upon fifty sovereign and self-governing states.
My only real concern is the possible deference a conservative court would continue to show to corporate interests, at the expense of labor and employment rights. Kennedy was often just as misguided on his corporate rulings as he was on social rulings. I really believe Citizens United is a prime factor why our culture is so politically polarized today, because it affords interests groups with unlimited resources to dominate communications.
The Affordable Care Act was written and passed by a democratically-elected legislature.
The Constitution is a finite document - it does not and cannot say any more than it already does. And our Constitution is the only reason why the United States avoided the disasters European democracies suffered in the 19th and 20th centuries. If you deeply care about family issues and believe the government can be a responsible engineer for social experimentation, then you should get out there and use the political process to make it happen. By all means, I wish you the best of luck. But you have no right under our federalist framework to subvert the judicial system and impose new laws upon fifty sovereign and self-governing states.
My only real concern is the possible deference a conservative court would continue to show to corporate interests, at the expense of labor and employment rights. Kennedy was often just as misguided on his corporate rulings as he was on social rulings. I really believe Citizens United is a prime factor why our culture is so politically polarized today, because it affords interests groups with unlimited resources to dominate communications.
The Affordable Care Act was written and passed by a democratically-elected legislature.
Last edited:
bigedole
Member
Just quoting to throw my support behind this post. So many people see the supreme court as a political tool to craft the kind of society they want, rather than what it actually is, which is purely a body of our government meant to have the singular purpose of interpreting and determining if our laws fall within the framework of the constitution. They do not create law, they enforce the constitution. The hysteria coming out today is just yet another shining example of how clueless the those people are about how our government is intended to work.
Death Dealer
Member
Well you originally said democrats were stupid for not "making" Ginsburg retire....
And I'm just saying there is no way they could make her retire. I don't think there is any stick available. It's not like they were going to impeach her. The best they could have done is say, don't assume the next president will be a democrat. But everyone was so sure Hillary was going to win. I think the least optimistic odds were from the NYT and they still predicted like an 80% chance, so hindsight is always 20/20.
From an actuarial standpoint, she will probably last until 2020, but if Trump get reelected, I would bet on him picking her replacement.
Texas Pride
Banned
Pretty big news with Ginsburg also in bad health. Elections have consequences and the potential of Trump getting at least 3 SC picks could reshape the SC for decades to come.
Captain Zyrain
Member
The online meltdowns are reaching epic proportions.
CampbellzSoup
Member
Honestly I was a moderate but the fucking insanity and the rhetoric of the left drove me more and more to the right. Seriously some of this shit is insane.
TrainedRage
Banned
Thanks Trump!
Similar threads
- Locked