The move would extend her 36-year House career and continue to freeze her would-be California successors in a long-standing holding pattern.

    • 3rihskerb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m just sayin RBG dying on trumps watch caused a ton of problems. They can retire gracefully on their terms and bring in fresh blood that isn’t bat shit crazy. It’s a similar situation we are in with fienstien and now the republicans are even in with McConnell.

    • nik0@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      It has a lot to do with SCOTUS. She decides to hold her position for as long as she lives and when she dies there won’t be any other candidate. This leads to a president or some clever figure to decide to send “their guy” to replace them and as such leads to the rights of many being removed. I mean that’s how MTG got in really and here we are with Roe V. Wade being demolished and every red state under the sun taking away women’s rights. All thanks to our brave hero RGB.

      • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        Newsom would appoint her replacement though?

        And still, the house has zero influence on SCOTUS appointments? So even if she somehow got replaced by a Republican (ig we’re assuming Newsom has a stroke and goes insane in this situation?), it would have no impact on SCOTUS appointments or any other judicial appointments, since those are done in the Senate.

        • nik0@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          The president should also have zero influence on the supreme court. Yet there was this whole thing with Obama and such that led to Trump having the perfect window of opportunity to send MTG to stand.

          • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I think you have that the wrong way around. According to the constitution, the President appoints a Supreme Court Justice with the Senate giving advice and consent. It’s the Senate that’s supposed to have the lesser role, but Mitch McConnell chose not to follow the spirit of the constitution on that.

            At any rate, the House of Reps have never been a part of the process, so it has nothing to do with Pelosi, and never has.