Summary

As Donald Trump prepares for a second term, progressive groups are concerned about Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s future on the Supreme Court.

Some activists hoped she would retire to allow President Biden to appoint a successor before Republicans take control of the Senate in January.

However, with Democrats’ narrow majority and opposition from Senator Joe Manchin, any replacement would face confirmation challenges.

Legal scholars and advocacy groups now view the window for Sotomayor’s retirement as closed and are focusing on confirming Biden’s remaining judicial nominees to lower federal courts before Republicans regain the Senate majority.

  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m ultimately glad, he was giving democrats a bad name. We could afford that a decade ago, but we no longer can.

    There’s a mild reshuffling of the parties happening, with the Tulsi Gabbards switching to red and the Adam Kinzingers switching to blue, and I’m fine with it. It’s about priorities. Which parts of your platform and beliefs are more important than the other parts?

    • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      with the Tulsi Gabbards switching to red and the Adam Kinzingers switching to blue

      Ugh, a future of having to choose between Russian agents and fucking tea partiers sounds bleak as hell, we’ve gotta be able to do better than that

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes, I think we can.

        But remember, during WW2 the USSR and the US were able to cooperate to defeat fascism. We cannot be too picky when it comes to alliances when there’s bigger fish to fry. Ideological purity is not our friend, never has been. Even if that makes everything a confusing pain in the ass, which it does, that diversity of opinion is necessary if we are going to robustly pursue our goals and not get too stuck up our own asses and blinded.

        • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          We didn’t let the USSR decide our troop deployments for us, and we didn’t tell everybody what a great guy Stalin was to sell war bonds. When it comes to potential voters, I agree with you we can’t be picky (like, if they’ve got a problematic stance on trans people or women or people receiving welfare or whatever I’ll try to politely and succinctly tell them why what they’re saying hurts to hear and then steer the conversation back to the many many things we do agree on), but when it comes to the people we put on stages, the people we elect, and the people who advise elected officials on policy and campaigns the Manchins and Kinzingers and Cheneys of the world are poison who will only lose us votes.

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I understand the sentiment, but I’m not so sure it’s actually true. We’ll have to see how many left leaning folks came out for Harris, percentage-wise. Not counting Gaza uncommitteds, they’re a different story imo.

            It’s all about the data though, nobody cares about sentiments or online complaints, it has to be hard numbers to actually convince people.