• cyd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    You haven’t put any thought into the situation.

    SC justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. Both are currently held by the democrats, the latter narrowly. Both are likely to flip next year. Sotomayor is over 70, diabetic, and travels with a medic.

    If she wanted to do the right thing for the causes she believes in, she should have resigned during the past one or two years. Biden would have been able to replace her with a younger, equally liberal justice. But she didn’t and probably won’t, so if she dies anytime in the next 4 years (or 8 years if the Rs win the presidential election after that) then the court goes 7-2 and will remain conservative-dominated for decades.

    • Tilgare@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m not sure anybody would make that call at her age. And to be clear, because you’re trying to infer that she is older than she is by calling her “over 70”, she’s 7 days past her 70th birthday; I’m not sure anyone would regard that as over 70, just 70. So at what point in her mid 60s was she supposed to decide “uh oh, I’m going to die soon”, exactly?

      And there are so many uncertainties when a replacing a SCOTUS justice that come in to play, especially with one side who will do anything to install their totalitarian regime and the otherside is on their high horse getting their legs sliced to bits because they were too righteous to jump off for the battle - why kick that beehive before it’s ACTUALLY necessary?

      • cyd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        why kick that beehive before it’s ACTUALLY necessary?

        Because by the time it’s actually necessary, you’re fucked. Case in point, if Sotomayor had resigned last year, her replacement would have sailed through, and there could be a 40 year old solidly liberal justice in her place, penning equally liberal opinions and poised to continue doing so for decades.

        But she didn’t, so if she acts now, her replacement would get caught up in “senate can’t nominate in election years for reasons” BS. Big political fight, but one that’s winnable since Dems ultimately hold the Senate.

        If she puts it off yet further, she would have to continue for the next 4, possibly 8+ years. And maybe by that time the democrats don’t have both the presidency and senate anymore, so her replacement is a less liberal consensus candidate.

        Failing to think strategically is an extremely bad idea when it comes to institutions like the Supreme Court.

        • Lightor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I don’t get why more justices didn’t do this. They’re basically rolling the dice and we end up right where we did with Trump replacing Ruth Bader.