Justices Sotomayor and Kagan must retire now

Vox ^ | 6/10/24 | Ian Millhiser

[cotton1706]

Let’s not beat around the bush. It is more likely than not that Donald Trump will return to the White House next year. Right now, polling averages show Trump with a slight popular vote lead over incumbent President Joe Biden. And, even if Biden overcomes this small deficit, the Electoral College system effectively makes Trump votes count more than Biden votes.

Although there may be signs that the Republican Party’s advantage in the Electoral College is fading, that advantage was substantial in the last two presidential elections. Democrat Hillary Clinton beat Trump in 2016 by more than two points in the popular vote, but still lost the Electoral College. Biden beat Trump by more than four points, but would have lost if a small number of votes had flipped to Trump in a handful of states.

That means that, if Justices Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan remain on the Supreme Court past this year, they risk allowing their seat to be filled by a convicted felon who tried to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States of America, inciting an insurrection at the United States Capitol in the process.

The full picture for liberals on the Supreme Court is even grimmer. It is still possible that Biden will prevail this November — polls fairly consistently suggest that the most engaged voters prefer the incumbent — but Democrats need a miracle to keep their majority in the malapportioned United States Senate.

Senate malapportionment is such a liability for Democrats that Republicans would not have controlled the Senate at all since the late 1990s if Senate seats were distributed fairly based on population.

[MrBambaLaMamba]

If the Hildabeast was President, both Sotomayor and Kagan would have committed suicide by now.

[Macoozie]

” If the US is a federation of states why are states not allowed to secede?”

A clear and correct observation.

Before the Civil War it was ‘these united States”.
After Lincoln destroyed the Constitution, it was “The United States”.

Half the People want one thing.
Half the people and their Ruling Class want something else. (see Codevilla)

National Divorce is the answer-
They hate us - we hate them
Can’t live under the same rules

No Civil War - Civil Separation
Choose Freedom- Choose Peace

[jdege]

https://eu.clarionledger.com/story/news/2024/04/21/trump-secret-service-protection-could-be-removed-under-rep-bennie-thompson-legislation/73406474007/

[Churchillspirit]

How clever the Founding Fathers were....

[cnsmom]

They know the newcomers may lean conservative and aren’t stupidly going to jump for handouts if they can make better money working. The newcomers are looking to work and get ahead and they will.The welfare class is about to be replaced the Democrats realize they can no longer afford them.

[SPDSHDW]

No it wasn’t.

That’s the Justification the North tacked on after they started shooting.

it was always tax revenues.

[DSH]

The Constitution is a magnificent document inspired by Providence.

Idolatrous nonsense.

This silly attitude, I'm sorry to say, is a large part of the problem we see today, as "we the people" are losing our liberties in real time.

Governmental structures are simply tools, a manmade means to an end. They are never an end in themselves. Until people wake the eff up and recognize that our "constitutional system" has now failed, and that it needs to be replaced, there's no hope of the current slide being reversed.

[RedMonqey]

That, in a nutshell, explains liberals know nothing about the government structure of the United States.

[Jim Noble]

Until people wake the eff up and recognize that our "constitutional system" has now failed, and that it needs to be replaced, there's no hope of the current slide being reversed.

The Declaration, which precedes the Constitution, says, "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Every American must now consider two critical questions about the government which owes its existence to the Constitution:

1) Are you safe?
2) Are you happy?

[DoodleBob]

The Designated Hitter is a purely Marxist idea.

The pitcher is on the field. He’s not a sacred relic. That sombich needs to take some batting practice.

[ronniesgal]

i’ll re read the article.

[hanamizu]

Apportioning the Senate by population? As if the Seventeenth Amendment wasn’t disastrous enough...

---

Happily, this idea cannot be changed by an Amendment, only by abandoning the Constitution itself. Article V states that denying a state equal representation in the Senate is one thing that cannot be changed.

Now, I have no doubt that leftists have no qualms about ditching our Constitution, but that, I hope is several bridges too far.

[DSH]

Every American must now consider two critical questions about the government which owes its existence to the Constitution:

1) Are you safe?

2) Are you happy?

Exactly. And nicely put.

Answering for myself:

Am I safe? No, I don't think I am safe, insofar as I consider the greatest threat to my wellbeing, and that of my family, to be my own government.

Am I happy? There, I would first say that, being that I am in Christ and am trusting in him for eternal life, I'm certainly "happy" in that respect. But as for this present life, in this fallen world, no, I'm not very happy at all.

As you obviously recognize as well, those on this site who truly believe that we're going to be able to "vote our way out" of our present predicament are deep in the throes of delusion.

[rwa265]

The same reason given for Justice Thomas retiring four years ago. Good thing he didn’t. The odds are in favor of them being alive and kicking five years from now..

[newzjunkey]

They fail the most basic civics questions. If they don’t understand the Senate, it’s not surprising they think J6 was in insurrection. Their suspicion and paranoia is why the electoral college is there to protect us as well as why the senate is apportioned the way it is. The Left fear what they fear because of their own craven impulses and appetite for political scheming.

[MoraBlack]

Thank you for your explanation. Much appreciated.

[wardaddy]

It was about power
Northern industrial power prevailed
Slavery was the excuse

[kabar]

Idolatrous nonsense. This silly attitude, I'm sorry to say, is a large part of the problem we see today, as "we the people" are losing our liberties in real time.

Idolatrous? Silly attitude? Read the Federalist Papers, our founding documents, and other writings by our Founding Fathers. They invoked the influence of Providence and a belief in natural rights. Our nation was formed based on those principles. It is neither idolatrous nor silly. The Declaration of Independence states,

"WHEN in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—-That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Governmental structures are simply tools, a manmade means to an end. They are never an end in themselves. Until people wake the eff up and recognize that our "constitutional system" has now failed, and that it needs to be replaced, there's no hope of the current slide being reversed.

Pure tautological nonsense. Replaced by what? The Constitution has kept this nation intact thru war and civil strife. It is the oldest written Constitution in the world, copied by many nations. It can and has been amended. Unfortunately, we are in a post-Constitutional period. The answer is to return to the Constitution, not replace it.

[KrisKrinkle]

“If the US is a federation of states why are states not allowed to secede?”

In my understanding:

They made an agreement or contract, all parties to which can be can be held to by the other parties (if they can do so) or released from with the acquiescence of the other parties.

The union of states predates the constitution.

It is a social contract. (Note 1)

The beginning was extralegal (Note 2) after which they established a legal system.

Before the agreement to unite, the 13 colonies were sort of in a state of nature (Note 3) in relation to each other. I say ”sort of” because they were part of an organized society in relation to each other in so far as they were part of the British Empire, but they dissolved the relationship with the British Empire when they “seceded” from the British Empire and subsequently strived to establish a new relationship...a new organized society…a new social contract.

When a party to a contract formed under the rules of an organized society wants out, they can be freed from the contract with the acquiescence of other parties to the contract, or held to/freed from the contract under the rules of the society.

When a party to a contract formed outside and not subjected to the rules of an organized society wants out, they can be freed from the contract with the acquiescence of other parties to the contract, or held to the contract, usually by superior force.

Note 1: Social Contract: an implicit agreement among the members of a society to cooperate for social benefits, for example by sacrificing some individual freedom for state protection. Theories of a social contract became popular in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries among theorists such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, as a means of explaining the origin of government and the obligations of subjects. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=social+contract

Note 2: Extralegal: not regulated or sanctioned by law. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=extra+legal+definition )

Note 3: State of Nature: In ethics, political philosophy, social contract theory, religion, and international law, the term state of nature describes the hypothetical way of life that existed before humans organised themselves into societies or civilizations. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=state+of+nature

[DSH]

Pure tautological nonsense. Replaced by what? The Constitution has kept this nation intact thru war and civil strife. It is the oldest written Constitution in the world, copied by many nations. It can and has been amended. Unfortunately, we are in a post-Constitutional period. The answer is to return to the Constitution, not replace it.

With all due respect, you're utterly clueless as to how late it is. But, please, do go on with your Boomercon idol worshipping.

The Federalist Papers?!? Really? No, you're NGMI.