Senator Dianne Feinstein's career was filled with firsts, including first woman mayor of San Francisco and one of two of the first women elected to the U.S. Senate from California.
couldn’t Obama have made an appointment while the senate wasn’t in session or something? i remember reading something like that, the issue with the democrats in the US as an outside observer is that they want to maintain the facade of playing by the rules so they don’t do ahit what’s required, Obama should have appointed his nominee and then push on RBG to retire and appoint another, as it stands his failure is letting the US slide into fascism
You’re referring to a recess appointment, in which the President can make certain temporary appointments without Congressional approval when Congress is in recess. But in recent times, even when Congress is technically not in session, the majority party keeps members around to gavel in quick sessions every few days so Congress never officially goes into recess.
Obama made some recess appointments anyway, and the matter is still being litigated. I bet nobody will make a substantive recess appointment until this is settled.
The process is the justice announces retirement (or dies) and then the president appoints a nominee. Perhaps Obama didn’t ask RBG to retire prior to 2014, or she refused. The president can’t force a change, but just react to one.
The Republican minority prior to 2014 blocked one of Obama’s recess appointments, so after 2014, even had RBG announced retirement, it was probably unlikely that a recess appointment would work. I assume at the time, they figured Clinton would be president in 2016 and that RGB could then retire during Clinton’s presidency.
Yes, after the recess which it mentions, it goes back to advise and consent. Obama could have forced a committee vote this way, but he would have lost in the end.
Iirc the president can do a temporary appointment. It will last the length of your presidency. But then the next president gets the permanent appointment.
Let’s be clear though, she isn’t the one causing these evils. That blame lies squarely on Republicans.
I believe there were several things in the last year of Obama’s term that should’ve happened, but because of how sure everyone was that Clinton was going to win, they decided it wouldn’t be worth it. I think RBG expected to retire until Clinton. And well, we know how that went.
I also suspect that their personality which led them to becoming trailblazers for women , and refusing to take no for an answer, is why they didn’t retire earlier. Their whole thing was not giving into people who didn’t want them there. That attitude became detrimental in their old age.
Blaming Republicans for causing evils is like blaming lions for eating other animals. Of course they’re going to. Of course. It’s up to Democrats, and all the rest of us, to deal with that.
Of course, but the problem is still the lions, and when we have the opportunity to, we should evict them. It is up to us to be the adults in the room. So just shouldn’t forget that our first and foremost goal is to get more adults in here.
Republicans aren’t an unstoppable force of nature. Republicans overturned Roe. Republicans have made abortions illegal. That is absolutely the Republicans fault.
Democrats should’ve done more. They should’ve pushed back harder against the Republicans stealing Garland’s seat, and they should’ve convinced RBG it would be safer for her to retire. I can understand why they didn’t, but that doesn’t change that they should’ve.
Let me put it this way, if you don’t mind a corny superhero analogy. If innocent people die when villains attack, the heroes did fail to save them, and are responsible for their deaths in a sense. But the villains who actually attacked are far, far more responsible. While chastising the heroes we shouldn’t forget to damn the villains, and prepare for a counterattack.
I’m getting really sick of these “icons for women in politics” dying from age-related conditions in office.
Every year I watch
RGBRBG retroactively destroy her own legacy by having refused to retire when she should have.Ruth Gator Binsburg?
Red, Green, Blue
deleted by creator
DVS - devious. Brilliant!
Well I suppose RGB could have retired under Obama, but we know how McConnell treated Obama’s nominees
couldn’t Obama have made an appointment while the senate wasn’t in session or something? i remember reading something like that, the issue with the democrats in the US as an outside observer is that they want to maintain the facade of playing by the rules so they don’t do ahit what’s required, Obama should have appointed his nominee and then push on RBG to retire and appoint another, as it stands his failure is letting the US slide into fascism
You’re referring to a recess appointment, in which the President can make certain temporary appointments without Congressional approval when Congress is in recess. But in recent times, even when Congress is technically not in session, the majority party keeps members around to gavel in quick sessions every few days so Congress never officially goes into recess.
Obama made some recess appointments anyway, and the matter is still being litigated. I bet nobody will make a substantive recess appointment until this is settled.
https://gai.georgetown.edu/supreme-court-to-decide-what-constitutes-a-senate-recess/
The process is the justice announces retirement (or dies) and then the president appoints a nominee. Perhaps Obama didn’t ask RBG to retire prior to 2014, or she refused. The president can’t force a change, but just react to one.
The Republican minority prior to 2014 blocked one of Obama’s recess appointments, so after 2014, even had RBG announced retirement, it was probably unlikely that a recess appointment would work. I assume at the time, they figured Clinton would be president in 2016 and that RGB could then retire during Clinton’s presidency.
Apparently he didn’t outright ASK but he did tactfully raise the issue.
She was stubborn though and just wouldn’t do it.
Presidential appointments to the Supreme Court still require a congressional hearing and a confirmation vote in the U.S. Senate.
https://newrepublic.com/article/138787/obama-can-put-merrick-garland-supreme-court
Yes, after the recess which it mentions, it goes back to advise and consent. Obama could have forced a committee vote this way, but he would have lost in the end.
Iirc the president can do a temporary appointment. It will last the length of your presidency. But then the next president gets the permanent appointment.
deleted by creator
Lol
You have to admit, she was a colorful character.
Yeah, man. Ruth Gader Binsburg
Justice Red Green Blue, compatible with any color synchronization program you run on your desktop.
It better be addressable RGB.
Let’s be clear though, she isn’t the one causing these evils. That blame lies squarely on Republicans.
I believe there were several things in the last year of Obama’s term that should’ve happened, but because of how sure everyone was that Clinton was going to win, they decided it wouldn’t be worth it. I think RBG expected to retire until Clinton. And well, we know how that went.
I also suspect that their personality which led them to becoming trailblazers for women , and refusing to take no for an answer, is why they didn’t retire earlier. Their whole thing was not giving into people who didn’t want them there. That attitude became detrimental in their old age.
Blaming Republicans for causing evils is like blaming lions for eating other animals. Of course they’re going to. Of course. It’s up to Democrats, and all the rest of us, to deal with that.
Of course, but the problem is still the lions, and when we have the opportunity to, we should evict them. It is up to us to be the adults in the room. So just shouldn’t forget that our first and foremost goal is to get more adults in here.
deleted by creator
Republicans aren’t an unstoppable force of nature. Republicans overturned Roe. Republicans have made abortions illegal. That is absolutely the Republicans fault.
Democrats should’ve done more. They should’ve pushed back harder against the Republicans stealing Garland’s seat, and they should’ve convinced RBG it would be safer for her to retire. I can understand why they didn’t, but that doesn’t change that they should’ve.
Let me put it this way, if you don’t mind a corny superhero analogy. If innocent people die when villains attack, the heroes did fail to save them, and are responsible for their deaths in a sense. But the villains who actually attacked are far, far more responsible. While chastising the heroes we shouldn’t forget to damn the villains, and prepare for a counterattack.