Stephen Breyer to Retire From Supreme Court After 27 Years

Yes they do. Welcome to 2022 and here comes 2024! When the GOP takes back the Senate in 2022/2023, Biden won't get through another nominee. Period!

81,000,000 votes could not have gotten 2020 more wrong!

 

The House is gone, for sure.
But, the Senate is still a tossup.

 

Only ones that would care about this statistic are those that race bait and see racism in every corner. Skin color should NEVER be a consideration for ANYTHING. Period.

 

What's funny about that is another T****er assumed you were talking about a Latina (Post 162)....

You guys need to get your stories straight.

But since Harris wasn't "hired", your premise was crap anyway...

 

I thought this was common knowledge, but here's a link

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemima...andmaid-in-a-religious-group/?sh=49b82e128932

 

"Skin color should never be a consideration for ANYTHING. Period."
There have been a multitude of things in the USA based on skin color.
1) Slavery
2) Jim Crow laws
3) Lynchings
4) Redlining
5) Church bombings
6) Medical experiments like the Tuskegee syphilis study
7) Inferior schools
Limited employment opportunities

Skin color has been very important ever since the founding of this country. It seems that now some people want to change that rule because it's not benefiting Whites as much as it used to.
What do you think @Kal'Stang?

 

Thank you. I hadn't heard of this.

 

And that means that we should conduct ourselves based on skin color NOW? In 2022? Sounds to me like you're stuck in the past. Instead of learning from history, you're continuing it.

And yes, I see your double entendre there. I for one don't care about race and never have. That's how I was raised. In fact I recognize the fact that due to technology eventually there will be no white people on this planet. So why waste my time on worrying about em?

But lets say you're correct. That the only reason "some people want to change that rule" is "because it's not benefiting whites as much as it used to". Shouldn't you be happy about that? White people want to change the rule to make things more equal. Shouldn't you be all for that? You DO want equality don't you? In ALL things? You DO want to stop the discrimination don't you? In ALL things? Well? Don't you?

 

No, I want to change things after POC have had a chance to catch up. It wouldn't be fair to change right now.
How about in 2055?
P.S. Why do you say technology will destroy Whites from the planet? I never heard that one.

 

All that you'll do is continue the racism with this "belief". You can't, and won't, stop racism, with racist policies. And there is no such thing as "catch up".

Its inevitable. Small planet thanks to technology making travel easy. Interracial marriages. White population of the world is small while POC makes up the vast majority. I see no way for white people to "stay white". Its simply not possible. Not if you support interracial marriages because you believe marriage is a Right and as such government should **** about who can and can't get married. Like I do.

 

Only if you stop calling me Dude.

 

And if you turn out to be wrong?

 

There were no revelations about Kavanaugh made public. There were baseless accusations that could be brought against anybody on the entire planet. Would you like it if your preferred judge had some random person from 30+ years prior come out with baseless accusations? Would you then suggest that their nomination be withdrawn? No need to answer....we all know what it is. Righty being accused?....burn em. Lefty being accused?.....ignore.

And if the democrats blacked a republican nominee in the same way McConnell did it......you'd be all in in favor of it. But then again, we all knew that as well.

 

And again I say that Harris is not qualified, having never been a judge. Nominating her would be incredibly stupid, and no one with more than two brain cells would see it as anything other than political shenanigans, something I think we all want less of where the SCOTUS is concerned.

 

Cliche much?

Whose truth do you mean?

 

I just don't like Clarence Thomas, never have. I've disagreed with nearly every SCOTUS decision he's written. My point being that while I also disagreed with Scalia, he at least would say things that could make me laugh, and I think that, like RBG, I would have liked him as a private person. I don't think I would enjoy Thomas' company much ... he's a bit of a sourpuss, always looks like he's been sucking on lemons.

 

Sorry, I "identify" as he/him/dude...

 

Bee ess. If that were true, why are they basically stating, with their decision to allow Texas to severely restrict reproductive rights, that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women in their childbearing years? Explain how the can ignore Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, which should block any state from restricting those rights, or stripping them altogether, which is where they seem to be going.

That's just one example of how conservative SCOTUS justices are interpreting the constitution to serve their agenda.

 

They were Conservatives, without a doubt. Everyone knew they would be, but I don't ride that train. IMO, RvW should stand up to 22 weeks. Please note IMO.

Now, since Biden has specified certain physical characteristics are the perimeters of his decision making process, then of course he will make his choices so those that support Biden can say 'he kept his promise', yet the question remains. Are they the most qualified of all choices, or is pigmentation and genitalia an actual 'qualification' these days?

 

That was who was selected, I'm not arguing that point. But you've not provided any information or proof that there were any others who could have served.

Why do people think that what happened 50+ years ago is the only thing that applies?

 

"That was who was selected, I'm not arguing that point".
Thank you.

 

Seeing as how this President already promised to select a black female nominee I'm already right because the process began from a place of leftist racial extremism. From here on its just a matter of stacking up the proof.

 

But it was okay when Reagan announced he would put the first woman on the court?

 

Indeed! It means he is looking in a pool that has been overlooked throughout history.

 

Other things are considered after more than 93% of the potential candidates are excluded from consideration.