Democrats in the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/u-s-senate" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Senate</a> are expressing concerns about the possibility of a scenario that echoes <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court</a> Justice <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/ruth-bader-ginsburg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ruth Bader Ginsburg</a> suddenly dying and giving way to a conservative majority during Donald Trump&#8217;s presidency.
A report from <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/top-democrats-wont-join-calls-justice-sotomayor-retire-still-fear-ruth-rcna145912" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NBC News</a> explored how this anxiety is centered on Justice <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/sonia-sotomayor" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sonia Sotomayor</a>, the oldest liberal member of the court at 69 and a lifelong diabetic, not stepping down while President Joe <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/joe-biden" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Biden</a> is in office and Democrats control the Senate.
&#8220;I’m very respectful of Justice Sotomayor. I have great admiration for her. But I think she really has to weigh the competing factors,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) told the news outlet. &#8220;We should learn a lesson. And it’s not like there’s any mystery here about what the lesson should be. The old saying — graveyards are full of indispensable people, ourselves in this body included.&#8221;
Though Blumenthal said Sotomayor is &#8220;a highly accomplished and, obviously, fully functioning justice right now,&#8221; he noted that &#8220;justices have to make their personal decisions about their health, and their level of energy, but also to keep in mind the larger national and public interest in making sure that the court looks and thinks like America.&#8221;
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the second-ranked Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said he is &#8220;not joining any calls&#8221; for Sotomayor to step down but warned of an &#8220;extremist wing&#8221; if the 6-3 conservative majority created during Trump&#8217;s presidency is allowed to expand further.
&#8220;Run it to 7-2 and you go from a captured court to a full MAGA court,&#8221; Whitehouse added. &#8220;Certainly I think if Justice Ginsburg had it to do over again, she might have rethought her confidence in her own health.&#8221;
Biden has been able to nominate just one person to the high court during his presidency. He selected <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ketanji-brown-jackson-sworn-in-as-supreme-court-justice" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ketanji Brown Jackson</a> to replace Stephen Breyer, who retired <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/justice-stephen-breyer-reveals-when-he-will-retire-from-scotus" target="_blank" rel="noopener">under pressure</a> from the Left.
Ginsburg long resisted a push by <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0G12UZ/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">liberals</a> who wanted her to retire as she reached her 80s and experienced <a href="https://people.com/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-health-ups-downs/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">health scares</a>. She <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-supreme-court-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-dies-from-cancer-complications" target="_blank" rel="noopener">died</a> of pancreatic cancer at the age of 87 in 2020, paving the way for Trump-nominated Amy Coney Barrett to take her place.
Some <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/should-sotomayor-retire-biden_n_66032a7ae4b006c3905731dd" target="_blank" rel="noopener">legal scholars</a> are now pushing for Sotomayor to step down, but the NBC News report claimed there are no signs that Sotomayor has plans to retire. However, <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/sotomayor-says-surprised-by-supreme-court-pace-tougher-workload" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according to Bloomberg Law</a>, she said in January that she was &#8220;tired&#8221; by the workload. Sotomayor has served on the high court since 2009 during the Obama administration.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1712234347815000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1G-VkjVO0p4qoEkiCI9cqF">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Biden is running for a second term, paving the way to a 2020 general election rematch against Trump. White House spokesman Andrew Bates said Biden &#8220;believes that decisions to retire from the Supreme Court should be made by the justices themselves and no one else.&#8221;
One Republican lawmaker quoted in the new report was Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who is 90 and has already <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3740578-grassley-has-already-filed-for-reelection-bid-in-2028/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed paperwork</a> to run for a ninth term in 2028. &#8220;Everybody’s got to make that personal decision,&#8221; Grassley said. &#8220;And I wouldn’t comment on it for somebody else, because that’s their decision. Just like it’s my decision to run for re-election.&#8221;

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor

Dem Senators Get Anxious Over Prospect Of Another Ginsburg Situation On SCOTUS

2024 Election

Courts

Politics

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

SCOTUS

Senate Democrats

Sonia Sotomayor

Supreme Court

U.S. Senate

A state court building in <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/new-york-city" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New York City</a> unveiled a new art project that is not going over well online.
The sculpture, entitled &#8220;NOW,&#8221; was installed on the roof of the Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State, First Department on Madison Avenue last week as part of an art exhibit from artist Shahzia Sikander. The statue is meant to represent the legacy of the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but New Yorkers and other viewers on Twitter noticed that the statue is both unsightly and unsettling.
Corporate consultant Andrew Beck shared pictures of the art installation in a Twitter thread. &#8220;A new statue atop a New York City courthouse,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;The artist says it’s part of an &#8216;urgent and necessary cultural reckoning underway as New York reconsiders traditional representations of power in public spaces and recasts civic structures to better reflect 21st-century social mores.’”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
A new statue atop a New York City courthouse. The artist says it’s part of an “urgent and necessary cultural reckoning underway as New York reconsiders traditional representations of power in public spaces and recasts civic structures to better reflect 21st-century social mores.” <a href="https://t.co/4IFRj7hCsf">pic.twitter.com/4IFRj7hCsf</a>
— Andrew Beck (@AndrewBeckUSA) <a href="https://twitter.com/AndrewBeckUSA/status/1618248543537606656?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2023</a></blockquote>
The roof of the court building is lined with statues of famous lawgivers from history and legend. The statue is situated on the corner of the building, with brazen metal standing out against the weathered stone statues next to it. It depicts a woman with hair braided into long spirals like ram&#8217;s horns, and a web of tentacle-like protrusions at each arm, wearing a lace apron like the one Ginsburg wore over her robe, and standing on a pink lotus flower.
A profile for the statue written by <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/25/arts/design/discrimination-sculpture-madison-park-sikander-women.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The New York Times</a> said that the statue is the first female figure placed on the court building. “She [the statue] is a fierce woman and a form of resistance in a space that has historically been dominated by patriarchal representation,” Sikander told The New York Times. Sikander said she entitled the piece &#8220;NOW&#8221; because it is needed in the current year when abortion rights are being challenged in the wake of the Supreme Court returning abortion law to the states in Dobbs v. Jackson Women&#8217;s Health Organization.
Sikander has another piece with similar designs placed in the area. That statue, an 18-foot tall recreation of the same figure, but with a metal cage symbolizing a hoop skirt, is entitled &#8220;Witness&#8221; and is placed in Madison Square Park across from the court building. The two statues together are entitled, &#8220;Havah…to breathe, air, life.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won. You earn it and win it in every generation.” Never fading words by Coretta Scott King. Inspired and humbled that Havah..to breathe, air, life’ ‘NOW’ &amp; ‘Witness’ are open on MLK day Jan16, 2023 ✊🏽❤️⚖️ <a href="https://twitter.com/MadSqParkNYC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MadSqParkNYC</a> <a href="https://t.co/TSpDl5C4TH">pic.twitter.com/TSpDl5C4TH</a>
— Shahzia Sikander (@shahziasikander) <a href="https://twitter.com/shahziasikander/status/1615129164465729536?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 16, 2023</a></blockquote>
But Twitter users immediately pointed out that besides being visually unpleasant, the sculpture idolizes abortion and has pagan or even demonic motifs.
&#8220;They turned abortion into a pagan idol to worship and put it on a courthouse,&#8221; <a href="https://twitter.com/BillyGribbin/status/1618289675122388992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1618289675122388992%7Ctwgr%5E30efe78ae6474befa57361f37ae990cc0100fe42%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpublish.twitter.com%2F%3Fquery%3Dhttps3A2F2Ftwitter.com2FBillyGribbin2Fstatus2F1618289675122388992widget%3DTweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Billy Gribbin</a>, communications director for Republican Georgia Congressman Rich McCormick, wrote on Twitter.
&#8220;The New York Courthouse has added this aesthetic atrocity to its sculptures of great lawmakers,&#8221; Daily Wire podcast host <a href="https://twitter.com/andrewklavan/status/1618335013480828930?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1618335013480828930%7Ctwgr%5E77b5ab54309b7133ba8f47f37b91ec38f0e65aa4%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpublish.twitter.com%2F%3Fquery%3Dhttps3A2F2Ftwitter.com2Fandrewklavan2Fstatus2F1618335013480828930widget%3DTweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Andrew Klavan</a> wrote. &#8220;It is meant to honor Ruth Bader Ginsburg&#8217;s pro-abortion stance by depicting a woman with demonic goat-horns who has clearly lost the power to reproduce. Or something.&#8221;
&#8220;The next Republican mayor of New York should not only remove but publicly destroy this monstrosity,&#8221; Daily Wire host <a href="https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles/status/1618358045003874306?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1618358045003874306%7Ctwgr%5E3a37c265f9e10933f3eb042594bc830d02ba9df4%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpublish.twitter.com%2F%3Fquery%3Dhttps3A2F2Ftwitter.com2Fmichaeljknowles2Fstatus2F1618358045003874306widget%3DTweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Michael Knowles</a> added.
&#8220;New York has put an androgynous baphomet with tentacles digging into its own torso on top of the courthouse in order to ‘better reflect 21st century social mores.’” writer <a href="https://twitter.com/NoJesuitTricks/status/1618330987339059200?s=20&amp;t=K550eA55xVco3ZOA2HVw_w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Brandon Meeks</a> said. &#8220;Sounds about right.&#8221;
&#8220;[T]he ugliness is the point,&#8221; New Founding and American Firebrand digital director <a href="https://twitter.com/loganclarkhall/status/1618290699845373953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1618290699845373953%7Ctwgr%5Ec9a4b5813dfee00c9d3ccbaa2ab44f549fce81dc%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpublish.twitter.com%2F%3Fquery%3Dhttps3A2F2Ftwitter.com2Floganclarkhall2Fstatus2F1618290699845373953widget%3DTweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Logan Hall</a> added.
&#8220;What a visual desecration of the landscape,&#8221; America First Legal Foundation founder <a href="https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/1618290002139701248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1618290002139701248%7Ctwgr%5Ea05c992adddc6075e77e9266e6cb27f1b7edc6db%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpublish.twitter.com%2F%3Fquery%3Dhttps3A2F2Ftwitter.com2FStephenM2Fstatus2F1618290002139701248widget%3DTweet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Stephen Miller</a> tweeted.
&#8220;WOW the baphomet/Aries symbolism is… a lot,&#8221; one Twitter user chimed in. &#8220;Especially given the opposite or sister sign Libra represents the scales of balance or ‘arms’ of Justice.&#8221;

NYC Court Sculpture

‘They Turned Abortion Into A Pagan Idol’: New York Courthouse Installs Statue Symbolizing Abortion And RBG

New York Courthouse Installs Statue Symbolizing Abortion And Ruth Bader Ginsburg, And Social Media Has Thoughts

New York City

Statues

Twitter

Earlier this year, Stanford University <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/youre-not-american-thats-offensive-youre-a-u-s-citizen-stanford-u-declares" target="_blank" rel="noopener">released a &#8220;harmful words&#8221;</a> list that includes dozens of everyday sayings and verbiage that it deemed hateful for one social justice warrior reason or another.
For many, it was a sign that the Left had gone one step further into insanity. Unfortunately, that kind of speech code is nothing new. In fact, it seems to be ripped right out of the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg&#8217;s playbook from 45 years ago.
The official title of the Stanford project is &#8220;The Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative&#8221; and billed as a “multi-phase, multi-year project to address harmful language in IT at Stanford.&#8221; The list included suggestions such as ditching the word &#8220;blind study&#8221; and instead saying &#8220;masked study.&#8221;
Why? Well according to The Harvard of the West, the frowned-upon word &#8220;unintentionally perpetuates that disability is somehow abnormal or negative, furthering an ableist culture.&#8221; Then it suggests ditching words like &#8220;pow wow&#8221; and even the word &#8220;American.&#8221;
It also instructed those using the manual to avoid gendered language in essentially all forms of communication — ie. saying &#8220;mail person&#8221; instead of &#8220;mailman.&#8221;
This attempt to control the conversation is nothing new. As mentioned, &#8220;RBG&#8221; as she is affectionately known by her fans, co-authored a book on the topic in 1977 titled &#8220;Sex Bias in the U.S. Code.&#8221;
Thanks to one classic newsletter from conservative icon <a href="https://www.phyllisschlafly.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/PSCA_PSR_26_12_199307.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Phyllis Schlafly in 1993</a>, Americans were warned that RBG&#8217;s radical views would be a detriment to the nation as she was being nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Bill Clinton.
&#8220;How does it happen that a Supreme Court nominee whose only experience in private law practice was seven years as general counsel to the ACLU came to be praised by almost everyone as a &#8216;moderate&#8217; and a &#8216;centrist&#8217;?&#8221; the mother-turned-activist said in &#8220;The Phyllis Schlafly Report&#8221; for July 1993. &#8220;My theory is: This just proves how easily men are fooled by a skirt. They deduced that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is &#8216;moderate&#8217; because she isn’t a loud-mouth frizzy-haired, bra-burning, street demonstrator.&#8221;
Indeed, the best-selling author went on to fully expose Ginsburg for the extremist that she was.
&#8220;In fact, Ginsburg’s writings betray her as a radical, doctrinaire feminist, far out of the mainstream,&#8221; the conservative said at the time. &#8220;She shares the chip-on-the-shoulder, radical feminist view that American women have endured centuries of oppression and mistreatment from men.&#8221;
That was no exaggeration.
In &#8220;Sex Bias in the U.S Code,&#8221; RBG and her co-author suggested that the U.S. remove more than 20 words or phrases from all U.S. laws and substituted them with the sort of language advocated by Stanford today.
According to Schlafly, the activist-turned-judge went far beyond changing merely language. In &#8220;Sex Bias in the U.S. Code,&#8221; Ginsburg also advocated an entirely gender-neutral society in which women were drafted to combat, prisons were sex-integrated, prostitution was legalized, and the practical elimination of all single-sex organizations and places of education.
Though it&#8217;s doubtful the current woke army draws their inspiration on these matters to RBG, it should be noted that all of those goals are being pushed by progressives in America as we speak.
The gendered language aspect is already widely accepted. It&#8217;s only a matter of time before they start demanding the other items with the same zeal.
Ideally, Republicans give more pushback to that insanity than they did in the early 1990s.
That year, RBG was confirmed to the Supreme Court by a vote of 96-3 with 40 GOP senators casting their support. However, granted that America recently had dozens of Republicans support changing the definition of marriage, that dream doesn&#8217;t seem likely. Worse, we have no Phyllis Schlafly nowadays to sound the alarm on liberal loons either.
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Stanford, Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Stanford’s New ‘Harmful Word List’ Is Right Out Of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Playbook From 45 Years Ago

Stanford's New 'Harmful Word List' Is Right Out Of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Playbook From 45 Years Ago

College

Political Correctness

Social Issues

Stanford

U.S.

Vox writer Ian Millhiser slammed late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg&#8217;s &#8220;arrogance&#8221; and called on sitting Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor to consider retiring rather than risk the possibility of an unfavorable Senate makeup later.
&#8220;Sotomayor and Kagan need to think about retiring,&#8221; the <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23507944/supreme-court-sonia-sotomayor-elena-kagan-ruth-bader-ginsburg-retire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">headline read</a>, and the sub-headline added the reason for his deep concern. The Senate, he alleged, was a &#8220;fundamentally broken institution&#8221; — and for that reason, Democratic justices needed to plan accordingly.
&#8220;We have now lived with the consequences of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s late-life arrogance for more than two years,&#8221; Millhiser wrote to open the piece, and then he went on to detail why he believed Ginsburg should have retired while former President Barack Obama was still in the White House and had a friendly Senate.
The problem he outlined — at least as far as Sotomayor, 68, and Kagan, 62, are concerned — was that Democrats could very well lose the Senate in two years&#8217; time, and he worried that it would be a long time before the <a href="https://reason.com/volokh/2022/12/21/should-justices-sotomayor-and-kagan-retire/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">balance of power</a> shifted in their favor again.
But then Millhiser got to the crux of the matter, revealing that his real problem was not actually the &#8220;so brutal&#8221; Senate map expected in 2024 — rather, he took issue with the Senate&#8217;s designated role as it was written into the U.S. Constitution: to balance the power of the states with the power of the people.
Calling the Senate &#8220;<a href="https://dailywire.com/news/democrats-are-going-about-house-and-senate-popular-ashe-schow/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">malapportioned</a>,&#8221; he argued that the Constitution gave &#8220;extra representation to Republicans in small states&#8221; — and that was the real reason that Democrats were unlikely to regain the majority (according to his math) until 2030 or even later.
&#8220;If Sotomayor and Kagan do not retire within the next two years, in other words, they could doom the entire country to live under a 7–2 or even an 8–1 Court controlled by an increasingly radicalized Republican Party’s appointees,&#8221; Millhiser complained.
Slate&#8217;s Mark Joseph Stern agreed with Millhiser, saying, &#8220;I think Sotomayor and Kagan are brilliant justices and I’d be sad to see them go. But Ian is indisputably correct about the political calculus here. After 2025, Democrats may not hold the White House and the Senate for a decade+. This argument should be taken seriously.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I think Sotomayor and Kagan are brilliant justices and I’d be sad to see them go. But Ian is indisputably correct about the political calculus here. After 2025, Democrats may not hold the White House and the Senate for a decade+. This argument should be taken seriously. <a href="https://t.co/VU0vQWPCxa">https://t.co/VU0vQWPCxa</a>
&mdash; Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) <a href="https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1605654255678984209?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 21, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
And while a fair number of Democrats agreed with his assessment, some also pointed out the fact that Ginsburg had been older and her health had not been as good when she opted to remain on the bench. The late justice had also <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-ginsburg/u-s-justice-ginsburg-hits-back-at-liberals-who-want-her-to-retire-idUSKBN0G12V020140801" target="_blank" rel="noopener">made it clear</a> that she would not bow to popular opinion when it came to calls for her retirement, saying, &#8220;So tell me who the president could have nominated this spring that you would rather see on the court than me?&#8221;

U.S. Supreme Court Women Justices Are Honored On Capitol Hill For Women’s History Month

Vox Writer Slams RBG ‘Arrogance,’ Says Kagan And Sotomayor Should Take One For The Team And Retire

Vox Writer Slams 'Arrogant' RBG, Says Kagan And Sotomayor Should Retire

Media

Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) used the horrific shooting that took place at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, to argue that one way to prevent more school shootings was to pack the Supreme Court.
Markey began by calling for <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/biden-goes-around-congress-with-police-reform-executive-order-blames-republicans/">gun control</a> — as have a number of his Democratic colleagues and even President Joe Biden — and then immediately pivoted to argue that the only way to ensure that gun control laws would not face a challenge or even face the possibility of being overturned was to add at least two justices to the Supreme Court.
&#8220;Ed Markey uses the Texas shooting to &#8230; attack the Supreme Court and push for court packing. If you&#8217;re one of the people who wants Washington to &#8216;do something,&#8217; on gun violence look at people like Ed Markey who want to shift the debate to every other political goal they have,&#8221; Matt Whitlock tweeted, along with video of Markey&#8217;s comments.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Ed Markey uses the Texas shooting to.. attack the Supreme Court and push for court packing.
If you&#39;re one of the people who wants Washington to &quot;do something,&quot; on gun violence look at people like Ed Markey who want to shift the debate to every other political goal they have. <a href="https://t.co/GumsYlR02y">pic.twitter.com/GumsYlR02y</a>
&mdash; Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) <a href="https://twitter.com/mattdizwhitlock/status/1529846488616079360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;We have to take very seriously the threat, which an illegitimate, far-Right Supreme Court poses to gun safety in our country,&#8221; Markey said, going on to claim that former President Donald Trump had &#8220;stolen&#8221; two Supreme Court seats and, in doing so, had rendered the Court &#8220;illegitimate.&#8221;
&#8220;We have to expand the Supreme Court to get back the two stolen seats that the Republicans and Donald Trump took from the American people, so that we can ensure that when we put gun safety laws on the books, they are not overridden by the Supreme Court of the United States,&#8221; he said.
Markey also joined President Biden in using the shooting to attack the National Rifle Association (NRA) and Republicans who support the Second Amendment.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
“What the American people want is for the NRA to stand for ‘Not Relevant Anymore’ in American politics.”
Sen. Ed Markey joins fellow Democratic senators and gun reform activists at press conference following elementary school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. <a href="https://t.co/bo5GYe1goQ">https://t.co/bo5GYe1goQ</a> <a href="https://t.co/elAvxYDWAE">pic.twitter.com/elAvxYDWAE</a>
&mdash; ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/1529856281707700227?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 26, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;What the American people want the NRA to stand for is &#8216;Not Relevant Anymore in American politics,'&#8221; Markey said, claiming that the Republican Party was stuck in the grip of the NRA and forced to &#8220;do what the NRA tells them that they should do.&#8221;
President Biden, after giving a cursory nod to the victims of Tuesday&#8217;s shooting, parlayed the <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/its-just-sick-biden-uses-school-shooting-address-to-slam-gun-lobby/">remainder of his address</a> to the nation into an attack aimed at the &#8220;gun lobby&#8221; and a warning aimed at any political opponents who would stand in the way of &#8220;common sense gun laws&#8221; moving forward.

US-POLITICS-RIGHTS-ABORTION-DEMONSTRATION

Senate Democrat Uses Texas School Shooting To Push For Packing The Supreme Court

Ed Markey Uses Uvalde Shooting Victims To Demand Packing The Supreme Court

Court Packing

Donald Trump

Ed Markey

Joe Biden

Merrick Garland

Gerontocracy (noun) : rule by elders: specifically, a form of social organization in which a group of old men or a council of elders dominates or exercises control.
Two-hundred forty-five years.
Two-hundred forty-five years ago the Declaration of Independence was signed in Philadelphia during the Second Continental Congress. Two-hundred forty-five years also happens to be the cumulative ages of the current Speaker of the House (Nancy Pelosi), House majority leader (Steny Hoyer) and majority whip (Jim Clyburn).
All three of them, of course, have declared they are running for re-election no matter how calamitous the midterm elections turn out to be for their own party.
The Senate is now the oldest it has been in all of American history. Last year, The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/06/02/senate-age-term-limits/">noted,</a> “Twenty-three members of the Senate are in their 70’s; only one is under 40. According to the Congressional Research Service, the average age of senators at the beginning of this year was 64.3 years—the oldest in history.”
My senator, Dianne Feinstein, turns 89 next month and has been the subject of <a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/dianne-feinstein-senate-17079487.php">a whisper campaign</a> questioning her mental capacity to continue in the job. Charles Grassley, of Iowa, has been a senator for over four decades.
Elderly senators are not a new phenomenon, of course—Strom Thurmond ran for president in 1948 and, 53 years later, was not only still in office, but was actually third in line to the presidency as President Pro Tempore. Robert Byrd, of West Virginia, required <a href="https://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20100628/NEWS/306289979/sen-robert-byrd-of-west-virginia-dead-at-92">two canes to walk</a> and, towards the end of his career, needed a wheelchair to travel around the capital.  
Joe Biden will be 82 years old at the end of his current term of office. He has already <a href="https://thehill.com/news/administration/3272281-biden-has-told-obama-hes-running-again/">told President Obama</a> he plans on running again in 2024. If Bernie Sanders had won the nomination and general election in 2020, he would have been 83 at the end of his first term. If Donald Trump pulls a Grover Cleveland and becomes the second non-consecutive two-term president in American history, he would be 82 at the end of his second term. 
In the past seventeen years, three sitting members of the Supreme Court have died while still serving. In the aftermath of a stroke, William O. Douglas’s health was so imperiled his fellow justices decided he would no longer write opinions and even said they would <a href="https://wamu.org/story/19/01/23/from-cover-ups-to-secret-plots-the-murky-history-of-supreme-justices-health/">refuse to count his vote</a> if he was part of a 5-4 majority. At 80 and suffering from thyroid cancer, William Rehnquist unequivocally <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/politics/rehnquist-denies-rumor-of-retirement.html">announced</a>, “I want to put to rest the speculation and unfounded rumors of my imminent retirement. I am not about to announce my retirement.” John Paul Stevens was 90 when he finally decided to retire. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was 87 when she passed away, almost certainly attempting to serve until a Democrat president could replace her.    
Yes, we have an age problem in our nation’s capital. 
Essays bemoaning the advanced age of the United States Congress and Judiciary are all the rage these days—<a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/03/gerontocracy-is-hurting-american-democracy.html">New York Magazine</a>, <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/supreme-court-retirement-age/616458/">The Atlantic</a>, and The Washington Post have all published them recently. But it isn’t just the Senate. 
 It’s clear we have a holistic age problem in our system of government and it is present at the commanding heights of all three branches of government.  
Don’t get me wrong. I have a deep and profound reverence for our elders, especially in the realm of political discourse. I’d much rather have the Pelosi-Hoyer-Clyburn trifecta running things in the House than “The Squad.” Henry Clay came out of retirement to help craft the Compromise of 1850 and avoid a premature Civil War. President Reagan was one of the most significant presidents of the 20th century and was also the oldest in history at the time. 
Older representatives and senators tend to be humbler in their capacities, more generous towards their colleagues, and aware of the arduous but necessary task of coalition-building through brokering consensus. They are not engulfed by the braggadocio and balderdash required to make a splash on social media or cable news. I am even beginning to much prefer an elderly Jerry Brown to a spry Gavin Newsom. 
Still. 
In order for our institutions to function properly, they must be populated by public servants who are unencumbered by the ailments of advancing age. The essential problem with a gerontocracy is that, in the winter of life, a four or six or life term can translate into a public servant possessing far different capacities at the end of a term than at the beginning. It is not ageist to worry about President Biden’s capacity two years into the future. It is not ageist to believe, like <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/supreme-court-retirement-age/616458/">Canada, Britain and Australia do,</a> that judges should not be allowed to continue in their jobs in perpetuity, regardless of their mental or physical state.   
The Founders were certainly concerned with age, but not old age, perhaps because they had achieved so much as young men. Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence at thirty-three. Madison wrote the Virginia Plan when he was merely thirty-six years old and his collaborator on The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton, was a buoyant thirty years of age at the Philadelphia convention. Teddy Roosevelt ascended to the presidency at the age of forty-two.  In Federalist Paper 62, Madison argued that minimum age requirements would provide for a “stability of character.” 
So, why were maximum age limits not discussed in Philadelphia? 
Obviously, people didn’t live as long as they live today. It simply wasn’t an option for leaders to serve in office decades beyond the peak of their vitality. 
But here is the real constitutional conundrum: notions of leadership and public virtue were wholly different during the genesis of the American republic. Overt political ambition was considered gauche and public service was supposed to be a temporary activity, not a way of life or career. Even those who clamored for power had to camouflage their ultimate aspirations in a veneer of oblique indifference. Madison had to beg Washington to chair the Constitutional Convention. Jefferson stepped back and let Madison take part in the party machinations that would eventually deliver TJ the presidency in 1800. Active campaigning was a prima facie disqualification for higher office. 
Not so today. 
No one pretends anymore. As much as normal people wonder why Pelosi, Feinstein, and Grassley don’t decide to spend more time with their grandchildren or take more Viking cruises, the modern reality is their thirst for political power often outweighs their capacity to effectively exercise it. Older congressmen and senators become far too reliant on staff to carry out their responsibilities. Supreme Court justices lean on their clerks. And in the case of President Biden, youthful and more progressive advisors clearly have many hands on the wheel of policymaking at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.   
There is a clear—admittedly undemocratic—solution at our disposal: amend the Constitution to set mandatory retirement ages for all three branches. What those ages should be and if they should differ from branch to branch is up for debate. Career politicians and lifetime appointees require an additional check on their power; a 28th amendment would be a logical and just measure to find a middle ground between pursuing a noble life of public service and endlessly indulging venal quests for power and position.          
Jeremy S. Adams is the author of the recently-released Amazon best-selling book Hollowed Out: A Warning About America&#8217;s Next Generation. He has taught American civics for 24 years in Bakersfield, California and was the 2014 California Teacher of the Year (DAR). You can follow him on Twitter @JeremyAdams6.

Adams – It’s Time to End the DC Geriatracy

It’s Time to End the D.C. Gerontocracy

Dianne Feinstein

Readers Pass

The Squad

Theodore Roosevelt

Katie Couric defended her decision to selectively edit an interview with the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in an appearance on the Today show Tuesday, noting that the media make editorial decisions on how to present a subject &#8220;all the time.&#8221;
Couric admitted, in her new book, that she selectively edited a 2016 interview with Ginsburg because, in it, Ginsburg was critical of football players like Colin Kaepernick who, at the time, were &#8220;taking a knee&#8221; in protest of racism and police brutality. Ginsburg did not approve of the protests and suggested that they showed a lack of appreciation for all America has to offer.
The gesture, Ginsburg said, showed &#8220;contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life.&#8221;
&#8220;According to Couric, she ‘wanted to protect’ Ginsburg and felt that the issue of racial justice was a ‘blind spot’ for her,&#8221; The <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10088027/Katie-Couric-admits-editing-Ruth-Bader-Ginsburg-interview-protect-late-justice.html">Daily Mail noted in their report</a>.
More likely, Couric was looking to protect Ginsburg from any potential fallout from leftist allies who were unlikely to share Ginsburg&#8217;s view of the Kaepernick-led protests.
&#8220;Couric felt that when Ginsburg said that people like Kaepernick were &#8216;dumb and disrespectful&#8217; they were comments that were &#8216;unworthy of a crusader for equality&#8217; like the liberal Supreme Court justice,&#8221; the outlet noted. &#8220;The day after the sit-down, the head of public affairs for the Supreme Court emailed Couric to say the late justice had &#8216;misspoken&#8217; and asked that it be removed from the story. Couric writes that she was &#8216;conflicted&#8217; because she was a &#8216;big RBG fan&#8217;, referring to Ginsburg&#8217;s moniker.&#8221;
Ultimately, Couric says she contacted fellow journalist David Brooks, who suggested that Ginsburg &#8220;probably didn&#8217;t understand the question.&#8221; She later edited down the interview to include some comments about Kaepernick and his fellow protesters but left out the comments Couric felt were &#8220;unworthy&#8221; of Ginsburg&#8217;s status.
In an interview with Today, host Savannah Guthrie pressed Couric on editing the interview, suggesting that Couric&#8217;s decision violated ethical standards.
&#8220;Ultimately, I think I should’ve included it, but I also think it’s really important to look at what I did include,&#8221; Couric said of the interview.
&#8220;How did you justify that? It violates a cardinal rule of journalism to do that,&#8221; Guthrie noted.
&#8220;Well, I think what people don’t realize is we make editorial decisions like that all the time,&#8221; Couric shot back.
&#8220;And I chose to talk about this and put it in the book for a discussion. I mention that it was a conundrum, that I asked Justice Ginsburg about Colin Kaepernick and taking the knee and how she felt about that,&#8221; she added. &#8220;And I did include the fact that she said it was dumb and disrespectful, it was stupid and arrogant, and quite a bit of what she said.&#8221;
She did not, however, include Ginsburg&#8217;s comments defending the national anthem, which change the character of Ginsburg&#8217;s earlier, more muted commentary.

“Turning Tables: Cooking, Serving, and Surviving In A Global Pandemic” – 2021 Tribeca Festival

Katie Couric Defends Editing Ruth Bader Ginsburg Comments Critical Of Colin Kaepernick: Media ‘Make Decisions Like That All The Time’

Katie Couric

In her new book, Katie Couric admits she edited a 2016 interview with Ruth Bader Ginsburg to suppress the Supreme Court Justice’s feelings about people who kneel in protest during the national anthem.
The former Today Show anchor reveals in her memoir “Going There,” which releases October 26, that Ginsburg told her athletes who kneel during the national anthem are showing &#8220;contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life.&#8221;
Couric writes that she removed the comments from the interview, published at <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg-on-trump-kaepernick-and-her-lifelong-love-of-the-law-132236633.html">Yahoo</a> five years ago, because she feared the then-83-year-old justice was “elderly” and “probably didn&#8217;t fully understand the question.”
According to the <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10088027/Katie-Couric-admits-editing-Ruth-Bader-Ginsburg-interview-protect-late-justice.html">Daily Mail</a>, which first broke the story, Couric said her intention was to “protect” Ginsburg because she believed the issue of racial justice was a &#8216;blind spot&#8217; for her. Couric did, however, include Ginsburg’s statement the anthem protests “dumb and disrespectful.”
This isn’t the first time Couric has been caught in a controversy over her editing choices. The same year she buried Ginsburg’s comments on kneeling, she also deceptively edited a documentary on gun control.
As <a href="https://variety.com/2016/tv/news/katie-couric-under-the-gun-apology-misleading-epix-1201785392/">Variety</a> reported at the time, her team edited footage of the film “Under the Gun” to make it seem as if Second Amendment advocates were stumped by a question on background checks when, in fact, they answered her questions immediately.
Couric later apologized for the deceptive editing, saying that as the executive producer, she was ultimately responsible:
<blockquote>“As executive producer of ‘Under the Gun,’ a documentary film that explores the epidemic of gun violence, I take responsibility for a decision that misrepresented an exchange I had with members of the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL). My question to the VCDL regarding the ability of convicted felons and those on the terror watch list to legally obtain a gun, was followed by an extended pause, making the participants appear to be speechless.”
“When I screened an early version of the film with the director, Stephanie Soechtig, I questioned her and the editor about the pause and was told that a ‘beat’ was added for, as she described it, ‘dramatic effect,’ to give the audience a moment to consider the question. When VCDL members recently pointed out that they had in fact immediately answered this question, I went back and reviewed it and agree that those eight seconds do not accurately represent their response….I regret that those eight seconds were misleading and that I did not raise my initial concerns more vigorously.”</blockquote>
Couric did not apologize for her decision to edit RGB in the gushy tell-all which also takes aim at her Today Show replacement Deborah Norville for being a perfectionist and Prince Harry for smelling of “cigarettes and alcohol.”

The 2020 MAKERS Conference – Day Two

Katie Couric Admits She Edited Ruth Bader Ginsburg Interview To Hide Justice’s Negative Opinion Of National Anthem Kneelers

Colin Kaepernick

National Anthem

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is issuing an apology for a heavily edited Tweet that quoted the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on abortion and women&#8217;s equality but erased &#8220;women,&#8221; replacing the gendered term with &#8220;person.&#8221;
&#8220;With Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, we lost a champion for abortion and gender equality. And on the anniversary of her death, the fight to protect abortion access is more urgent than ever,&#8221; the tweet said, referencing a quote from the late Justice&#8217;s confirmation hearings.
But while the tweet specifically referenced abortion in relation to &#8220;women&#8217;s rights,&#8221; the gender activists edited Ginsburg&#8217;s quotes to avoid any reference to a specific gender, instead referring to &#8220;women&#8221; as &#8220;person,&#8221; in line with the group&#8217;s position on transgender issues.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
With Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, we lost a champion for abortion and gender equality. And on the anniversary of her death, the fight to protect abortion access is more urgent than ever. <a href="https://t.co/vIKadIHouN">pic.twitter.com/vIKadIHouN</a>
&mdash; ACLU (@ACLU) <a href="https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1439259891064004610?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person&#8217;s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity&#8230;When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices,&#8221; the quote read.
The original quote used &#8220;women&#8217;s,&#8221; and the female-oriented pronoun, &#8220;her&#8221; &#8212; references no longer acceptable.
Although the progressive left should have been delighted, it turned out the late Justice receives something of a blanket forgiveness for her regressive approach to gender, and the ACLU faced a severe blowback, leading to Monday&#8217;s apology.
&#8220;The A.C.L.U. tweet, which was sent out Sept. 18, changed Justice Ginsburg’s words, replacing each of her references to women with &#8216;person,&#8217; &#8216;people&#8217; or a plural pronoun in brackets. Justice Ginsburg, who died last year, is a revered figure in liberal and feminist circles and directed the A.C.L.U.’s Women’s Rights Project from its founding in 1972 until she became a federal judge in 1980,&#8221; The New York Times noted.
“We won’t be altering people’s quotes,” Anthony Romero, the group&#8217;s executive director told the outlet. “It was a mistake among the digital team. Changing quotes is not something we ever did.”
Romero did try to explain himself &#8212; and the erasure of pregnant women &#8212; by telling the Times, &#8220;There are people who are pregnant and who seek abortions&#8230;who do not identify as women.&#8221;
“My colleagues do a fantastic job of trying to understand a reality that people who seek abortions are not only women,” he added. “That reality exists.&#8221;
“In today’s America,&#8221; Romero continued, “language sometimes needs to be rethought.”
Justice Ginsburg, though, Romero added, will be exempt from &#8220;rethinking&#8221; going forward, at least as far as her quotes are concerned. He then suggested that Ginsburg would agree with him and would &#8220;encourage&#8221; the ACLU to &#8220;evolve&#8221; its thought on the matter
The ACLU, Romero said, will look for more sensitive ways to try to press the idea that women are not the only ones who get pregnant and seek abortions &#8212; a statement in line with progressive thought on the subject.
Feminist author Michelle Goldberg, though, suggested that the ACLU may have to re-examine their approach, particularly given that Ginsburg was a feminist, and erasing a women&#8217;s role in reproduction has a deleterious effect.
&#8220;It’s somewhat Orwellian to rewrite historical utterances to conform to modern sensitivities,&#8221; Goldberg said. &#8220;Changing Ginsburg’s words treats what was once a core feminist insight — that women are oppressed on the basis of their reproductive capacity — as an embarrassing anachronism.&#8221;

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Attends Naturalization Ceremony  At National Archives

ACLU Head Apologizes For Editing Ginsburg Gender Equality Quote To Erase ‘Women’

Abortion

ACLU

Feminism

Ginsburg

<div class="css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn">
<div class="css-53u6y8">
The leader of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) apologized Monday night for honoring the one-year anniversary of Ruth Bader Ginsburg&#8217;s passing by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/aclu-strips-gendered-language-from-ginsburg-quote-about-women-having-abortions">removing references to women</a> in a quote about women and abortion. The alteration appears to have been a bizarre attempt at making the late justice&#8217;s words more inclusive.
“We won’t be altering people’s quotes,” Anthony Romero, executive director of the ACLU, told <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/us/aclu-apologizes-ginsburg-quote.html">The New York Times</a> on Monday evening. “It was a mistake among the digital team. Changing quotes is not something we ever did.”
Last week, the organization decided to tweet an altered version of the quote and received intense backlash for it.
The original quote, which the ACLU was <a href="https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1440797678388932622">fine repeating</a> on its website in the original last year — reads: “The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. … When government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”
But the ACLU digital team decided to remove the gendered language from the quote so it would read: “The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity… When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices,” reads the text of the ACLU’s tweet, which put brackets around the words they inserted.
Although Romero said the mistake would not happen again, he appeared to justify the alteration as well-intentioned, telling The New York Times that it “was not a mistake without a thought.&#8221; The tweet was still online as of Monday night.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
With Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, we lost a champion for abortion and gender equality. And on the anniversary of her death, the fight to protect abortion access is more urgent than ever. <a href="https://t.co/vIKadIHouN">pic.twitter.com/vIKadIHouN</a>
— ACLU (@ACLU) <a href="https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1439259891064004610?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“Having spent time with Justice Ginsburg, I would like to believe that if she were alive today, she would encourage us to evolve our language to encompass a broader vision of gender, identity and sexuality,&#8221; Romero <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/opinion/rbg-aclu-abortion.html">told</a> the Times.
Other left-wing language changes have appeared around the topic of women as well.
On Monday, an editor for The Lancet, a prestigious medical journal, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/top-medical-journal-editor-responds-to-outrage-after-its-cover-calls-women-bodies-with-vaginas">apologized</a> to &#8220;those who were offended&#8221; by the recent issue cover, which used the phrase &#8220;bodies with vaginas.&#8221; The editor, however, also said he wanted &#8220;to emphasise that transgender health is an important dimension of modern health care, but one that remains neglected,&#8221; and encouraged people to read the full article (which did use the word &#8220;<a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01962-0/fulltext">women</a>&#8221; a handful of times).
And earlier this year, Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) invoked the phrase &#8220;birthing people&#8221; when talking about maternal health. She also used the phrase “menstruating person.”
</div>
</div>

VH1 Trailblazer Honors 2018

ACLU Leader Says ‘It Was A Mistake’ To Alter Ruth Bader Ginsburg Quote About Women, Strip References To Women

The American Civil Liberties Union shared an abortion quote from the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg earlier this week but replaced the word “woman’s” with “person’s.”
The organization’s tweet was shared around the anniversary of Ginsburg’s passing and comes as the ACLU has been drawing attention to a Texas law that bans abortions after the beginning of a fetal heartbeat can be detected, or around six weeks of pregnancy. But the tweet also seemed designed to adhere to one of the latest developments to come from left-wing circles — the idea that bearing children is not limited to women.
“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity&#8230; When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices,” reads the text of the ACLU’s tweet, which put brackets around the words they inserted.
The original quote — which the ACLU was <a href="https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1440797678388932622">fine repeating</a> last year, as writer Jesse Signal has noted — reads: “The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. … When government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
With Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, we lost a champion for abortion and gender equality. And on the anniversary of her death, the fight to protect abortion access is more urgent than ever. <a href="https://t.co/vIKadIHouN">pic.twitter.com/vIKadIHouN</a>
— ACLU (@ACLU) <a href="https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1439259891064004610?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2021</a></blockquote>
Other left-wing language changes have appeared around the topic of abortion, including the invocation of the phrase “birthing people,” as Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) remarked earlier this year when talking about maternal health, as well as the phrase “menstruating person.”
“The gutting of Roe v Wade imperils every menstruating person in the US, every person who engages in sex, and every person who values our constitutional right to privacy,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) after the Supreme Court declined to block the Texas abortion law from taking effect earlier this month. “Just one reason Roe isn’t a ‘women’s issue’ beyond the fact that people who aren’t women can menstruate too!”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The gutting of Roe v Wade imperils every menstruating person in the US, every person who engages in sex, and every person who values our constitutional right to privacy.
Just one reason Roe isn’t a “women’s issue” beyond the fact that people who aren’t women can menstruate too!
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1435639330102460424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2021</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Trans, two-spirit, and non-binary people have always existed and will always exist.
People can stay mad about that if they want, or they can grow up
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1435674825557749763?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 8, 2021</a></blockquote>

Fourth Annual Berggruen Prize Gala Celebrates 2019 Laureate Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg In New York City – Inside

ACLU Strips Gendered Language From Ginsburg Quote About Women Having Abortions

Women

Leftists turned on the feminist hero and women&#8217;s rights crusader, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, after the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 vote, refused to block the implementation of Texas&#8217; &#8220;heartbeat bill&#8221; on September 1st, effectively banning most abortions after fetal cardiac activity can be detected.
&#8220;The Supreme Court was careful not to weigh in on the constitutionality of the Texas law, deciding its ruling on procedural grounds. The Texas law contains a unique enforcement mechanism that authorizes private citizens to sue abortion providers and those who &#8216;aid and abet&#8217; illegal abortions,&#8221; The Daily Wire noted Thursday.
&#8220;The court dismissed the request, which names every state court judge and clerk as defendants, based on procedural grounds,&#8221; the outlet continued.
“It is unclear whether the named defendants in this lawsuit can or will seek to enforce the Texas law against the applicants in a manner that might permit our intervention,” the majority justices said in their ruling. “The State has represented that neither it nor its executive employees possess the authority to enforce the Texas law either directly or indirectly. Nor is it clear whether, under existing precedent, this Court can issue an injunction against state judges asked to decide a lawsuit under Texas’s law.”
Key to the ruling was Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who sits in the seat Ginsburg vacated when she died.
At the time, leftists were quick to blame Ginsburg for the addition, which shifted the court to the right, because Ginsburg was given the opportunity to retire under a Democrat &#8212; then-President Barack Obama &#8212; and chose to remain on the court. After several difficult battles with cancer, Ginsburg died in September of 2020, and then-President Donald Trump quickly replaced her with Barrett.
Now, they&#8217;re taking aim at Ginsburg, yet again.
&#8220;In retrospect, maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg should have stepped down from the Court in 2014,&#8221; one leftist commentator sneered.
&#8220;Ruth Bader Ginsburg really, really should have stepped down,&#8221; another added. &#8220;When you are a leader of people, with their lives in your hands… you have to do what’s best for them, always. She didn’t.&#8221;
When she was offered the opportunity to step down, she was 80 and Democrats had a comfortable majority in the Senate, allowing Obama to replace her with a dedicated liberal justice and without Republican input.
&#8220;Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s categorical refusal to retire brought us here. So thanks you old dead white bitch,&#8221; sniffed a self-described &#8220;feminist&#8221; who later deleted her tweet.
&#8220;Folks blaming Bernie for what happened in Texas are ridiculous,&#8221; a former Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) surrogate snapped after leftists tried to pin the blame on Sanders and his supporters, who refused to back then-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in 2016. &#8220;Did y’all not remember the time when we there was a democrat in office and had the chance the tell Ruth Vader Ginsburg to retire but didn’t? Stop it. The establishment needs to take responsibility for their mess.&#8221;
The same leftists are now pushing Justice Stephen Breyer to resign and allow President Joe Biden to appoint his own replacement so that what happened with Ginsburg does not happen again. Breyer did not step down after the Supreme Court&#8217;s last term, likely because the Court is about to hear landmark cases on subjects like abortion in its 2021-2022 session.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court

‘Old Dead White B****’: Leftists Turn On Late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg After Supreme Court Refuses To Block Texas Heartbeat Law

Amy Coney Barrett

Menu