• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Not relevant to what I asked. If you can’t answer what I asked, I’m not going to talk to you about anything else, sorry.

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

      A Democrat who concedes to Republican threats will be as likely to put a guy like Thomas up as Trump would. We got lucky with Jackson, but Biden’s clearly in a state of deterioration. Very likely we end up with him compromising us down to another Thomas or ACB in his second term, as he and his friends on the Judiciary committee are known to do.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I wish you would just admit you can’t answer what I asked.

        For the very last time and please just answer and stop moving the goalposts: If the parties are the same, why would Trump have chosen Jackson as a SCOTUS justice?

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          If the parties are the same, why would Trump have chosen Jackson as a SCOTUS justice?

          Ask Bush Sr why he picked David Souter. I have no idea why he’d pick a justice like Jackson, but conservatives picking liberal judges has been known to happen.

          All I know is that - between Biden Democrats and Trump Republicans - we’ve had a stacked conservative court despite Democrats holding the Presidency for twice as long. This would suggest that both parties endorse a conservative majority on the courts.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I have no idea why he’d pick a justice like Jackson

            If the parties were both the same, you would have an idea since it would be the same reason Biden did it. But you can’t say that since you know Trump would not pick a left-wing black woman for a justice as that is absolutely absurd.

            So thank you for proving my point.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              If the parties were both the same, you would have an idea

              That’s nonsense. Can you explain how Bush Sr picked both Souter and Thomas? He’s the same guy, so explaining the gulf between the candidates should be easy.

              But you can’t say that since you know Trump would not pick a left-wing black woman

              Bush Jr picked liberal feminist Harriet Myers less than a month before he switched to rabid conservative fanatic Samuel Alito. Myers was shot down by Biden’s judiciary committee. Can you explain that?

              Can you explain the gulf between Merrick Garland and Sonya Sotomayer? Both Obama nominees. How about the distance between Sandra Day O’Conner and Robert Bork? Both Reagan nominees.

              You don’t know your judicial history. You certainly don’t know how Trump or Biden make political decisions.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Souter and Thomas were right-wing and calling Harriet Miers a feminist or even suggesting she is a capable justice on the level of justice Jackson is proof that you are not serious.

                Again- if the parties are the same, Trump and Biden would have the same reason to pick her.

                Which you are claiming is not the case.

                Which, again, proves my point.

                Either they are the same or they’re not the same. You want it both ways.

                And no, I’m not going to explain anything while you insist on having it both ways, sorry.

                But… since you know your judicial history and know why they pick justices, you can still explain what that same reason is.

                So what is it?

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Souter and Thomas were right-wing

                  Souter was a reliable liberal vote for the entirety of his term on the bench. And he was from the same Harvard legal school that dominates the Supreme Court to this day.

                  calling Harriet Miers a feminist or even suggesting she is a capable justice on the level of justice Jackson

                  This is gibberish. She’s not a feminist? She’s not capable of the level of justice? What on earth are you even talking about? Miers had been a sponsor of the Women’s Studies department at HBU since the 90s, ran multiple successful legal firms hearing cases at all levels of the judiciary in both Texas and California, and headed up the Texas State Bar before joining Bush Jr as his personal lawyer. She was right in line with conservative Democrats appointed by Carter, Clinton, and Obama, and could easily have stood in for Ruth Bader Ginsberg or Ketanji Brown Jackson as a professional judge.

                  Either they are the same or they’re not the same

                  They are the same. They consistently put up candidates from the same insular club of Harvard Ivy League SCOTUS clerks. When Presidents step outside of line - as with the Miers nomination or the Bork nomination - the Senate reins them back in, regardless of the quality of the candidate.

                  since you know your judicial history and know why they pick justices, you can still explain what that same reason is.

                  There’s your reasoning. Its the Biden Judiciary that controls who has sat the bench and who has been disqualified for the last 40 years. And that’s why the SCOTUS sucks today. Jackson is not exemplary. She’s just another Harvard lemming, groomed to strictly defer to conservative hegemony that dominates legal jurisprudence.

                  Trump may well pick someone outside that niche, but the Senate will kill the nomination and force him back into his lane. Then he’ll queue up yet one more cloistered nun of the Harvard Law Review, just like his peers in the Democratic Party.