GR

GOP refuses to let the people decide Justice Ginsburg’s successor

The day after Ruth Bader Ginsburg lay in state in the U.S. Capitol—the first woman and first Jewish American ever to be accorded that honor—President Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill her seat on the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made it clear that he plans to confirm the nominee before Election Day—now just 37 days away. The GOP’s refusal to let the people decide Ginsburg’s successor threatens to undo her legacy and deal a fatal blow to the Affordable Care Act.

On Nov.  10, the Court will hear a challenge that could overturn the entire Affordable Care Act. That would result in 21 million Americans losing health coverage, skyrocketing premiums for the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions that now include COVID-19, the return of lifetime caps on coverage, and kicking children off their parents’ health plans before age 26. Collective bargaining, public education, voting and LGBTQ rights, First Amendment protections, racial and social justice, and much more are also at stake. The winners of the 2020 elections, which are already underway, should choose and confirm the next Supreme Court justice.


Tell the senate to allow the next president to pick Ginsburg’s replacement.

6 responses to “GOP refuses to let the people decide Justice Ginsburg’s successor

  1. President Obama nominated a Supreme Court justice on February of 2016, but Republicans refused to hold confirmation hearings using their own rule of “ it’s an election year; the people will vote in November this year on who should be the President for the new term. The elected President in November should choose the new Supreme Court justice. The people should choose…”

    This hypocrisy and dishonest behavior from the Republican leadership is intolerable.

    1. Yes, but President Obama did indeed make his nomination. There was no screeching and throwing of fits about whether or not he was “allowed” to do so, because, of course, he was.

      The Senate was also within their rights to take up the case of the nominee as they saw fit.
      They chose not to do so until a later time.

      If the Republicans in the Senate at that time had the votes, which I believe they did, I would rather have seen them vote to deny Merrick Garland instead of doing what they did, but nothing outside the rules was done, whether you want to admit it or not.

  2. Apparently, you have forgotten your recent history…Mitch McConnell did not do his job 4 years ago, and REFUSED to consider Obama’s pick almost a year before the election, saying that the seat should not be filled in an election year. And as far as Ruth Bader Ginsburg is concerned, again you have forgotten your history. The U.S. is giving her the due respect she deserves, because she dedicated her life to our constitution, and has done more than you or I, or most people will ever do to protect the rights and freedoms of all citizens in the United States!

    1. Quite literally him refusing was his job and within his duties. The Senate is a check on the presidency, not a rubber stamp. If it were the case that the Senate and House were to just do what the president asks, then why have them at all? Why pay for well over 500 legislators and their staff’s?
      I absolutely think McConnell is going about this contrary to what he said 4 years ago, and I think he’s gonna end up looking really bad. But the bottom line is, he was within his right at the Senate leader, and the Senate as a whole is a check on the presidency.

  3. For anyone who is too young to remember, is not a student of world history, has forgotten the purpose of our US Constitution then I recommend reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Too many similarities for this patriotic grandma!

  4. The “people” do not choose Supreme Court justices. They are nominated by the President (who as of now is Donald Trump, whether you like that fact or not) and confirmed or denied by the Senate (which as of now is majority Republican, whether you like that fact or not).

    Quite frankly, I find this Ruth Bader Ginsburg worship to be getting just a little carried away, and more than a little creepy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *