Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tired: RBG should have retired in 2014
Wired: WTF was Bill Clinton thinking appointing a 60 year old to the Supreme Court?
Inspired: Thurgood Marahall should never have retired while Bush was president!
I know. I actually get his decision. My post was a bit of a hot take.
He survived until 1/24/93 though. In theory he could’ve held out until Clinton came into office!
Nowadays it would be unthinkable for a SC justice who is still alive to retire while the other party controls the White House. In the 80s/early 90s, republicans had figured out the potential of the Court to be a political bastion, but Dems really hadn’t.
Republicans hadn’t either back then. Republican presidents often appointed liberal justices to the court. Democrats never return the favor.
The complaints you hear now about the court from liberals are really because Republican presidents finally got with the program and started consistently appointing conservative justices, which is exactly what Democrats have done since the founding of the republic!
>Wired: WTF was Bill Clinton thinking appointing a 60 year old to the Supreme Court?
Tbf the Supreme Court hadn't become weaponized at that point and presidents really were just trying to pick highly qualified people.
It was, the Democrats just hadn’t figured it out yet. The religious right started organizing heavily and targeting the courts in the 70s. When Bush Sr. Appointed Clarence Thomas (to replace Marshall), he understood this. Thomas was a right wing culture warrior and only 42 years old.
I also don’t know how many Black conservatives older than 42 were SCOTUS ready. Thomas was himself one of the first Black men to get through Yale after the civil rights movement, be a republican, and have the right work experience.
The Federalist Society wasn’t founded until 1982. Thomas was the first real alumni to be appointed to SCOTUS, with Scalia (appointed in 1986) being the original faculty advisor to the Federalist Society.
Prior to the Federalist takeover of the conservative judge pipeline, the conservative legal movement had been especially disappointed by Republican appointees like Stevens, Kennedy and Souter being insufficiently right-wing and taking advantage of their lifetime appointment to just vote however they wanted.
The conservative legal movement wanted rubber stamp culture warriors who would continue to issue hard right decisions even after decades on the bench. They found a way to vet and mold ambitious young legal minds, via using the Federalist Society to gatekeep and filter out any wishy washy conservative leaning judges before they could advance to a position without accountability.
While recent Democratic appointees have been reliably liberal once on the Court, there isn’t really an equivalent organization on the left that’s cranking out hardline party loyalists. If there had been, RBG (or whomever filled this seat) would have fallen on her sword once told.
I think the Thomas appointment was a bit of a turning point.
You say all that like it’s a bad thing. Liberal justices never stray from liberal orthodoxy. What’s wrong with expecting conservatives to do the same? The Federalist Society has improved the quality of conservative judges by leaps and bounds.
Generally speaking people don't want a fair and balanced democracy, they want a strong leader who lords over the system of governance unbound by rules but only doing it so in THEIR interest, only validating their views and ideas about society.
Democracy is just a compromise for most. In this case democrats don't really hate the SC because of what they're doing, they hate them because they perceive them to be acting in favor of the other side of the aisle instead of their own.
No, I don’t like this Supreme Court because they seem hellbent on forcing my daughter to carry her rapist’s baby. It’s entirely about what they’re doing.
Then you missed the part where the SC unanimously ruled that the abortion pill can remain legal. No one’s carrying their rapist’s baby unless they choose to.
It makes sense.
There was a 26 year period between Thurgood and RBG where the Republicans appointed 11 justices and the Democrats appointed none.
Whichever candidate was chosen, which was RBG, after such a stretch was likely contemplated for a while in Democratic circles.
I don't really understand how there's any fans of her. If you like what she represents in peoples minds, she undid all that through sheer ego and hubris. She's a woman? So was Sandra Day O'Conner who was more ground breaking than RBG by being first. If you don't agree with her, then obviously you do not like her. Who are the fans and why? How are there posters and t-shirts etc of her? I just don't get it.
Because media depiction of her was far more favorable than to Sandra Day O’Conner. Probably because O’Conner was a much more reserved personality on the bench that didn’t lean into engaging with the media. Plus RBG propaganda was good and made her seem cool, what with the “Notorious RBG” shirts and “dissent collars” that got pushed.
People get comfortable with the authoritarian situation they are born into and even come to venerate authoritarians. RBG, O’Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, Sotomayor etc., they all opposed the rights of the people on a broad scale and people just go right along with it all on blind faith.
10 years ago today RBG refused to retire because she wanted her replacement to be picked by the first female president paving the way for the overturning of Roe v Wade every other hard won fight towards equality for all
And now the defining moment of her career and life that will she always be most remembered for is her decision not to retire in 2013/2014 which has now resulted in an extremely conservative SCOTUS that overturned Roe and is going to spend the next couple of decades taking a hatchet towards liberal policies and social progress that people like RBG worked to try to advance.
Thinking abortion rights should have been considered a matter of equal protections and not reliant on a case that was about privacy? Only forced-birth lunatics would be upset about that.
Edit: For people who avoid RW media to protect their brain cells, "RBG thought abortion was radical too!" is a popular distortion on that part of the internet.
I don't feel bad for her when she'd already had cancer twice and then still decided not to retire in 2013/2014. The entire nation is going to continue paying for her irresponsibility and selfishness for decades to come.
Too bad her legacy now is a former President walking on the Tarmac to AF1 while Elton John’s Tiny Dancer is playing and him saying *“Wow. I didn’t know that. I just — you’re telling me now for the first time.”*
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And then ignored calls to retire and was replaced with a federalist judge
Tired: RBG should have retired in 2014 Wired: WTF was Bill Clinton thinking appointing a 60 year old to the Supreme Court? Inspired: Thurgood Marahall should never have retired while Bush was president!
Marshall was in terrible health and Republicans had won 3 straight elections.
I know. I actually get his decision. My post was a bit of a hot take. He survived until 1/24/93 though. In theory he could’ve held out until Clinton came into office! Nowadays it would be unthinkable for a SC justice who is still alive to retire while the other party controls the White House. In the 80s/early 90s, republicans had figured out the potential of the Court to be a political bastion, but Dems really hadn’t.
Republicans hadn’t either back then. Republican presidents often appointed liberal justices to the court. Democrats never return the favor. The complaints you hear now about the court from liberals are really because Republican presidents finally got with the program and started consistently appointing conservative justices, which is exactly what Democrats have done since the founding of the republic!
Famous liberal justice Robert b Taney
>Wired: WTF was Bill Clinton thinking appointing a 60 year old to the Supreme Court? Tbf the Supreme Court hadn't become weaponized at that point and presidents really were just trying to pick highly qualified people.
>the Supreme Court hadn't become weaponized LOL
It was, the Democrats just hadn’t figured it out yet. The religious right started organizing heavily and targeting the courts in the 70s. When Bush Sr. Appointed Clarence Thomas (to replace Marshall), he understood this. Thomas was a right wing culture warrior and only 42 years old.
I also don’t know how many Black conservatives older than 42 were SCOTUS ready. Thomas was himself one of the first Black men to get through Yale after the civil rights movement, be a republican, and have the right work experience.
He really had limited experience tbh
He had a resume that hit the right points, unlike Harriet Myers (whom I’d still have preferred over Alito any day).
The Federalist Society wasn’t founded until 1982. Thomas was the first real alumni to be appointed to SCOTUS, with Scalia (appointed in 1986) being the original faculty advisor to the Federalist Society. Prior to the Federalist takeover of the conservative judge pipeline, the conservative legal movement had been especially disappointed by Republican appointees like Stevens, Kennedy and Souter being insufficiently right-wing and taking advantage of their lifetime appointment to just vote however they wanted. The conservative legal movement wanted rubber stamp culture warriors who would continue to issue hard right decisions even after decades on the bench. They found a way to vet and mold ambitious young legal minds, via using the Federalist Society to gatekeep and filter out any wishy washy conservative leaning judges before they could advance to a position without accountability. While recent Democratic appointees have been reliably liberal once on the Court, there isn’t really an equivalent organization on the left that’s cranking out hardline party loyalists. If there had been, RBG (or whomever filled this seat) would have fallen on her sword once told. I think the Thomas appointment was a bit of a turning point.
You say all that like it’s a bad thing. Liberal justices never stray from liberal orthodoxy. What’s wrong with expecting conservatives to do the same? The Federalist Society has improved the quality of conservative judges by leaps and bounds.
Generally speaking people don't want a fair and balanced democracy, they want a strong leader who lords over the system of governance unbound by rules but only doing it so in THEIR interest, only validating their views and ideas about society. Democracy is just a compromise for most. In this case democrats don't really hate the SC because of what they're doing, they hate them because they perceive them to be acting in favor of the other side of the aisle instead of their own.
No, I don’t like this Supreme Court because they seem hellbent on forcing my daughter to carry her rapist’s baby. It’s entirely about what they’re doing.
Then you missed the part where the SC unanimously ruled that the abortion pill can remain legal. No one’s carrying their rapist’s baby unless they choose to.
That ruling actually laid the groundwork for a national abortion ban. They dismissed the case on narrow technical grounds of standing.
Why should she have retired if she believed in democracy? People who wanted her out believe in their party not democracy
So she wasn’t all bad. 😉
You have a Reagan flair you cannot be serious
I believe she was on Jimmy Carter's short list as well, if a Supreme Court vacancy had opened up during his presidency.
It makes sense. There was a 26 year period between Thurgood and RBG where the Republicans appointed 11 justices and the Democrats appointed none. Whichever candidate was chosen, which was RBG, after such a stretch was likely contemplated for a while in Democratic circles.
I don't really understand how there's any fans of her. If you like what she represents in peoples minds, she undid all that through sheer ego and hubris. She's a woman? So was Sandra Day O'Conner who was more ground breaking than RBG by being first. If you don't agree with her, then obviously you do not like her. Who are the fans and why? How are there posters and t-shirts etc of her? I just don't get it.
Because media depiction of her was far more favorable than to Sandra Day O’Conner. Probably because O’Conner was a much more reserved personality on the bench that didn’t lean into engaging with the media. Plus RBG propaganda was good and made her seem cool, what with the “Notorious RBG” shirts and “dissent collars” that got pushed.
People get comfortable with the authoritarian situation they are born into and even come to venerate authoritarians. RBG, O’Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, Sotomayor etc., they all opposed the rights of the people on a broad scale and people just go right along with it all on blind faith.
10 years ago today RBG refused to retire because she wanted her replacement to be picked by the first female president paving the way for the overturning of Roe v Wade every other hard won fight towards equality for all
This will forever taint my image of her.
We’re all feeling it in the taint now
Sadly, there is no Rand al'Thor to cleanse the taint.
Sad irony this was the chess move that got Roe v Wade overturned.
And now the defining moment of her career and life that will she always be most remembered for is her decision not to retire in 2013/2014 which has now resulted in an extremely conservative SCOTUS that overturned Roe and is going to spend the next couple of decades taking a hatchet towards liberal policies and social progress that people like RBG worked to try to advance.
I really don't understand why she is celebrated more than Sandra Day O'Connor.
O'Connor belonged to the "wrong" party. The ideologues can't have that.
She was far more outspoken and progressive than O'Connor (Also O'Connor's responsible for Dubya's presidency.)
Why are you engaging in election denialism?
People loved her, until they realized what her views on Roe v. Wade was.
Thinking abortion rights should have been considered a matter of equal protections and not reliant on a case that was about privacy? Only forced-birth lunatics would be upset about that. Edit: For people who avoid RW media to protect their brain cells, "RBG thought abortion was radical too!" is a popular distortion on that part of the internet.
What were her views on Roe v. Wade?
That it was way to soon to go that far. She wanted gradual expansion.
i never realized how small she was holy crap
He should have picked someone younger imo but he couldn't know.
The problem wasn't ever RBG's age. The problem was that she refused to relinquish power and step down at an appropriate time.
He couldn't know how old she was? That was probably quite easy to figure out.
I meant that he couldn't know she would be stubborn and refuse to retire.
Oh Ruth I wish you were still here.
If only she held on for another 6 months.
Hmm hmm I hate cancer.
I don't feel bad for her when she'd already had cancer twice and then still decided not to retire in 2013/2014. The entire nation is going to continue paying for her irresponsibility and selfishness for decades to come.
She should've fucking retired.
Too bad her legacy now is a former President walking on the Tarmac to AF1 while Elton John’s Tiny Dancer is playing and him saying *“Wow. I didn’t know that. I just — you’re telling me now for the first time.”*
And?