Submitted by NPRjunkieDC t3_zyckiw in washingtondc
Comments
[deleted] t1_j2522q5 wrote
[deleted]
AsbestosIn0bstetrics t1_j252v85 wrote
Not to mention, she lacked the good sense to retire at a time when she could've been replaced with someone who isn't a total right wing wackjob.
Ainwein t1_j2547gu wrote
Yeah - as much as I appreciate her jurisprudence she put vanity/pride/whatever over the country and multiple generations are going to feel the sting of her decision.
gutterbrain73 t1_j254zcs wrote
Fascinating...
[deleted] t1_j255ow3 wrote
dataminimizer t1_j258dxu wrote
This is so cringey.
ellivretaw1 t1_j259pc5 wrote
99% of custom license plates are.
vermillionmango t1_j25ohhp wrote
Man I liked RBG but she tossed out everything she did when she let her ego come before good sense and refused to retire in 2013. No one is irreplaceable, and now a 6-3 conservative SC for the next 10-20 years is what we get for one woman's pride.
[deleted] t1_j25r8jm wrote
[removed]
big_thanks t1_j25t858 wrote
People who worship RBG are so selective in their memory.
She's the #1 reason for the state of our current Supreme Court. She also really wasn't the progressive hero many memorialize her as.
Also... local hero? She was born in Brooklyn lol.
IAmTerdFergusson t1_j25xkuy wrote
weirdo
NPRjunkieDC OP t1_j26594w wrote
She had no reason to think Hillary would lose .
NPRjunkieDC OP t1_j265db6 wrote
Was she told/given a chance to retire in 2013?
vermillionmango t1_j266tnh wrote
Everyone knew it was probable Dems would lose the Senate in 2014. Obama even met with her to try and convince her to retire.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/25/us/politics/rbg-retirement-obama.html
She was 79, had been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer twice already. It was pure hubris on her part to remain on the court.
NPRjunkieDC OP t1_j26b6pa wrote
Thx for the link. But not even Obama expected the extreme polarization that led to his choice for the SC not even being considered for about a whole year . Unprecedented, I think.
realNoahMC t1_j26ciga wrote
>She was 79, had been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer twice already. It was pure hubris on her part to remain on the court.
TWICE? Holy shit! Regardless of your political affiliation or beliefs you can't deny that this is fucking egotistical! Regardless, may she rest in peace.
ertri t1_j26ji6a wrote
She was notably way worse on native issues than resistance lib Gorsuch
Formergr t1_j26tx8p wrote
What do you mean, “given a chance” to retire? She was a SCOTUS judge, she could retire whenever she wanted.
jaredb123 t1_j26ux3f wrote
Most dorks per capita
NPRjunkieDC OP t1_j26v6pw wrote
There's a link to a NYT story about Obama asking/hinting she should retire before the Dems lost 2014 Midterms
Formergr t1_j27swjo wrote
Right, agree. But the comment made it seem as if she needed to be asked to resign/retire in order to do so, and that no one had asked yet, so she didn’t.
mrkenny83 t1_j28704g wrote
Isn’t RGB from New York?
KillLaKillmonger t1_j28wvu6 wrote
Our? 🤣
BoomerangingBrain t1_j29qikf wrote
This. I hate having to agree with it but it's simple fact.
She was, it turns out, human.
big_thanks t1_j2a3o06 wrote
Why not? She didn't know Trump would be the nominee. Her best opportunity to retire was years before the 2016 election cycle even started.
The whole point is she shouldn't have left it to any chance. She fucked around and now we'll be paying the price for generations to come.
NPRjunkieDC OP t1_j2ab6hk wrote
It's not her fault that Garland didn't even get a hearing when Obama put him forth as a candidate . Close to a year with one SC justice less
big_thanks t1_j2acfli wrote
You're conflating two very different things.
Ginsburg was rumored to have been asked to retire as early as 2013 (when the Dems still controlled the Senate, i.e. so they could replace her with any candidate they wanted before the 2014 election); Garland wasn't nominated until 2016.
NPRjunkieDC OP t1_j25149e wrote
2 pix!