Yves here. While Neuburger is correct from a political perspective, federal judges famously leave feet first, and Supreme Court justices even more so. They didn’t work hard for the opportunity to Leave Their Footprints in the Sand of Time (cf. Carcinoma Angels) to cut that gig short prematurely. So asking Sotomayor do Team Dem a solid at her expense no doubt will strike her as a bit much.
By Thomas Neuburger. Originally published at God’s Spies
“In general, pride is at the bottom of all great mistakes.”
—William Ruskin
”Pride went before, ambition follows him.”
—William Shakespeare
It doesn’t get simpler than this. From Nate Silver at his Substack site:
Sonia Sotomayor’s retirement is a political IQ test
Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three remaining liberal Supreme Court justices, will turn 70 years old in June, is diabetic and had one parent who died at a young age. There are some offsetting factors at work — women live longer than men, and Sotomayor undoubtedly has access to world-class health care. So I’m not going to pull out an actuarial table or pretend to precisely estimate her lifespan. However, there is clearly a chance that Sotomayor will die or become unable to carry out her duties before Democrats again control both the presidency and the Senate.
I am not the only person to bring up this touchy subject. Josh Barro has been advocating for Sotomayor to retire. And the issue has reached the mainstream: Democratic Senators Richard Blumenthal and Sheldon Whitehouse have alsonot-so-subtly encouraged her to find the exit door.
However, I’m going to be more blunt than any of them. If you’re someone who even vaguely cares about progressive political outcomes — someone who would rather not see a 7-2 conservative majority on the Supreme Court even if you don’t agree with liberals on every issue— you should want Sotomayor to retire and be replaced by a younger liberal justice. And — here’s the mean part — if you don’t want that, you deserve what you get.
“Here’s the mean part — if you don’t want that, you deserve what you get.” No kidding.
‘An Extraordinarily Self-Centered Thing To Do’
Our Supreme Court’s center-left justices are rightly praised for many of their rulings (and not so praised for others).
But the legacy of Ruth Bader Ginsberg is perhaps the most mixed. For example(emphasis mine):
That the canonization of Ginsburg comes during a time of antiracist uprising is especially troubling, given her dismissive stance towards Black revolutionary politics. When asked for comment on former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand during the national anthem, Ginsburg saidshe thought his silent protest against racism and police brutality was “really dumb,” adding “if they want to be stupid, there’s no law that should be preventive. If they want to be arrogant, there’s no law that prevents them from that. What I would do is strongly take issue with the point of view that they are expressing when they do that.” Ginsburg clearly viewed herself as generous and tolerant for stating that she “wouldn’t lock a person up for doing it.” “It,” of course, is the exercise of their first amendment rights and the defense of the cause of oppressed people.
Her dismissive, callous attitude towards someone asking the state not to murder Black people mirrors the attitude of conservative Justice Atonin Scalia, whose friendship with Ginsburg centrists often tout as an example of how everyone should get along.
See also this.
Now consider this piece from Politico, published after Ginsberg’s death but before the reversal of Roe v Wade. It touches directly on the fact of her non-retirement (emphasis mine).
“It’s certainly hard for me, now, to think of her work and of her — and not to, these days, work up a degree of regret and anger,” says Dorothy Samuels, who authored The New York Times’ legal editorials during her 30 years on the paper’s editorial board. “This is so multilayered because she cared so passionately about advancing equality for everybody. … And yet, what she has helped to give us is a court that for a long, long time is going to be undoing the equality rulings that she was part of.”
Samuels heard the same thing from former clerks and other inner-circle members while researching a book in the years before Ginsburg’s death. “It was an extraordinarily self-centered thing to do.”
“She gambled,” says Michele Dauber, the outspoken Stanford law professor, speaking of Ginsburg’s apparent calculation that Hillary Clinton would be in the White House to appoint her successor. “But she didn’t just gamble with herself. She gambled with the rights of my daughter and my granddaughter. And unfortunately, that’s her legacy.”
I’m not ready to say that Sotomayor will do what Ginsberg did. In fact, I think she will do what Ginsberg should have done. Pride goeth before a fall, and to her credit, I’m not sure how prideful Sonia Sotomayor is.
But Silver is correct. This is a test of everyone’s politics.
Not Just the White House, But the Senate Too
After all, the Democratic Party has to not only win the White House to secure the next post-election justice pick, they have to win the Senate too. And that’s by no means certain. Silver again: “Overall, prediction markets give Democrats only a 25 percent chance of keeping control of the Senate.”
Will they take that chance? Will Party leaders call for her to step down if Sotomayor shows reluctance? After all, she’s not yet ill and may well choose to stay on.
How confident are Party leaders in the next election? We may soon find out. After all, pride goeth, etc. Stay tuned.
50 comments
Comments are closed.
Manchin has already stated his opposition to judges if they don’t get bipartisan support. So then they would count on Sinema for the 50th vote? Or on Manchin caving? Neither seem like great options.
And anyway, wouldn’t Biden just search for a Clarence Thomas 2.0 figure to show his bipartisanship?
( Every time I heard former Congressman Dick Armey speak on TV, I always thought he had the slightest trace of a Spanish accent. Did Dick Armey begin life as Dick Armijo, perhaps? Is he a Latino under deep Anglo cover? If he is, perhaps Biden could nominate Dick Armey, to maintain the level of Latino diversity on the Supreme Court).
He is from Switzerland. The Swiss Armey knife is named after him.
Also, Joe Biden is from Russia. His real name is Boris Bidenoff.
I though he was Yosyp Bidenko, since his fortune seems to come from Ukraine…
Well, as they say . . .
” Don’t make it worse, its Bidenoff.”
And “Creepy” Yosef has his very own Jill Fatale to keep the “spice” flowing.
Maybe The Democrats should first check they really can force their nominee thorough, because last time republicans were able to block Obama’s replacement for Scalia and it felt to Trump. It would be really funny if Sotomayor resigned only for Trump to win and be able to deliver the 7-2 majority they want to avoid.
It would be hi-larious if B nominated Merrick Garland, B’s current AG and O’s past nominee to fill Scalia’s seat.
The worry about her age (70 for a job she doesn’t actually have to do anything except sit when she feels like it) when Biden is president leads me to one conclusion: it’s a last minute push to get rid of Harris. Show her the polls and offer her this. The theory is Senators will welcome one of her own. Manchin and Sinema will do whatever, and no Republican will vote yes. Team Blue elites have never quite figured the GOP plays for keeps.
I can hear Sotomayor now: “Who the *#+* are Neuburger and Silver?”
…and she’d be right to ask that question. As for Ginsberg:
“This is so multilayered because she cared so passionately about advancing equality for everybody.”
Everyone? I beg to differ: https://www.palestinechronicle.com/justice-for-some-not-for-all-ruth-bader-ginsburg-and-indigenous-rights/
When it comes to indigenous rights, hard to beat Justice Gorsuch. Nominated by a Republican no less.
So the Dems are trying to nudge the first and only Latina justice off the bench. That’s not going over too well in the Hispanic caucus, and presumably not going over too well with Hispanic voters.
Hispanic Lawmakers Resist Calls on Justice Sotomayor to Retire
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/hispanic-lawmakers-resist-calls-on-justice-sotomayor-to-retire
(Dems wonder why B is losing support in the Hispanic communities?)
I’ll wager that there are plenty of conservative female Latina judges available for Trump to promise to appoint one “if you vote for me to be your President.” Outcome, a bigger share of the Latino vote for Trump in November.
This has also been all over the teevee. Who is boosting it? Sotomayor isn’t even that old.
The White House is my guess. In theory a Supreme Court confirmation hearing should play well for Biden. He can “fight” for Roe without doing anything and the msm will be full of fluff pieces about an innocuous justice. It will give guys like Krugman an opportunity to pen opeds on this instead of yelling at people for not understanding inflation because the rich are getting great deals on super yachts.
Then there is the obvious problem. What to do with Harris? She’s a drag, not just dead weight, and even if Biden squeaks out a win, Harris will own Team Blue party apparatus going into 2026 and 2028. The wipeouts might put 1932 to shame.
It’s ironic that he’d want her out so that he can place a “liberal” justice in the USSC. I remember how Biden was instrumental in getting Clarence “he has no clearance” Thomas nominated. The Democrats are not friends of the people.
If this isn’t obvious, it is Nate Silver admitting that Biden’s chances in November 2024 aren’t looking good. The Lawfare hasn’t managed to kick Trump off the ballot. Biden is doing poorly in the polls and the voter sentiment is negative.
If the Democratic Establishment is smart, which they aren’t, they would offer really good exit opportunities for the Supreme Court Judges to leave early. Of course in the long run, this will invite the Republicans to do the same.
Another possibility that hasn’t been considered is that the donor class, which really controls the strings here, may actually prefer a Trump Supreme Court pick. It gives the Democrats something to rage over when they are picked and worsens the partisan divide. The donors would also prefer an economically conservative judge, although I suspect that Biden would pick a neoliberal anyways.
Regardless of the party, I’m sure that the Supreme Court will be servants to the rich. There are many reasons why many people are looking forward to the US experiencing a moment like the USSR did in 1991.
“If the Democratic Establishment is smart, which they aren’t, they would…” swap Biden out for Michelle Obama.
Nah. The O’s already have 3 mansions they acquired after Barry’s time in office. Give another family a chance at the trough. / heh
They are celebrities, all they wanted. Michelle was a traditional first lady, a Barbara Bush type. She played to a different crowd than Barbara, but she had nothing to do with the administration.
Ultimately, she would embarrass everyone involved including herself. The Obamas know this. Michelle is born out of the same fantasy as Oprah. If we could only find the right person, all the hard work of elections could be ignored.
To an extent, she is like Biden without the drive to play wheel and deal.
Atleast Biden had the good sense not to give a war criminal a loving hug in public.
I’d take a public hug over the unlimited resources Biden is feeding Israel’s war crime with.
Fellating Satanyahoo on the tarmac doesn’t count?
Just like his buddy, DT. Who is the “biggest friend of Israel”? DT says Jews should vote for him instead of Genocide Joe. That’s what we call meaningful choice and democracy
Kushner says he is interested in some prime Mediterranean waterfront property in Gaza at rock-bottom prices. He is personal friends with uncle Bibi
But Biden had the bad judgment to present a medal to George and Laura Bush.
https://www.thedp.com/article/2018/10/liberty-medal-2018-joe-biden-george-laura-bush-gutmann-philadelphia-penn-upenn
If Biden had good sense, he would have subcontracted out this medal awarding task to someone else.
oh please……
Asking Sotomayor to set down – but not clearly mental defect Biden. Your honor, I rest my case.
70?? And this is old for a lawyer? Besides, imagine THOSE hearings for a new justice during this upcoming magical, wonderful campaign season.
Nate, trying to stay in the news?
Forecaster needs an audience.
I do not trust Biden to appoint a new justice. Just look at his last appointment, Justice Jackson. During her confirmation hearing she couldn’t answer what a ‘woman’ was because she was not a biologist. This is pure cowardice; state your position on whether transwomen are women and let it ride. Then she complains during oral arguments that the First Amendment as written would “hamstring” government control of speech. Are you family blogging kidding me?
I’d rather take my chances with Trump, he might give us another Gorsuch (as opposed to another Kavanaugh, and I have no strong opinion either way on Barrett.)
Justice Kackson got the position because of the color of her skin lol.
Jealous?
Sauce for the Thomas, sauce for the Jackson.
Anyway, shouldn’t you be looking for seaside land to buy in Florida?
Team Dem is worried about a lucid 70yo Latina while supporting a decrepit, senile, totally bonkers white guy president. The hypocrisy lol.
Hypocrisy is an integral part of politics: you accuse the so-called opposition of what you are guilty of.
Money is free speech, political bribery is now legal thanks to the institution of SCOTUS. When the highest court in the land flagrantly abuses their power, and abuses the law, we have to ask some questions. But few can be bothered – it’s easier to go along and not rock the boat. Everything is just fine: we have freedom and democracy, and the “rule of law”.
And of course, the indispensable, exceptional nation is funding Israeli genocide of Palestine and all sorts of other illegal activities. Rule of Law?
What! Male Presidents, or ex-Presidents, contending for a second term are not old at 81 or 77? But female Supreme Court Justices are old at almost 70? :-)
I am a bit peeved at RBG for hanging on at the Court until her death at age 87 in 2020. She really could have taken one for the team and retired during Obama’s term, allowing him to appoint another less conservative justice.
To be fair, how did the Garland appointment go? RBG has her faults, but she may have recognized Obama for the clown he was.
substitute “grifter” for “clown” and you’ll be on the mark.
What obviously stares us in the face is the stupidity of making the SCOTUS jobs for life. This has made it very desirable from several perspectives like prestige, leaving a legacy etc etc. Just term limit them.
Seems to me that it is more likely Sonia will be alive after Donald’s term ends than Joe getting a Justice past the Senate.
But Joe would probably be better off if the election was about the Supreme Court and not him. Fund raising would be easier.
Yves posted in September 2023 that it was too late not to nominate Biden, yet at the beginning of this year we had a useless round of questioning his nomination in the mainstream press. I feel like this is a similar situation and it’s too late to let Sotomayor resign. It’s not a strategic resignation if there’s no strategy in place.
Apologies in advance for this baseless speculation, but would a (contrived?) Sotomayor health episode in the fall help Biden at the polls?
Yeah, I kind of feel the same, that it would be too late. Add to this how feckless the Dems are at actually accomplishing anything and the fact the they have been willing to let the Reps steamroll them over the court in the past (see Obama) and seems to me like the best they could hope for is a “but the courts!” rally in November that would ultimately be kayfabe.
“Justice Kackson got the position because of the color of her skin lol.”
Prejudice is socially harmful and shameful.
Also, Nate being the dutiful Blue soldier is maybe trying hard ti change the subject from Gaza, Ukraine and the flood across the Southern border
Yeah, but don’t buy into the election-year hysteria of the “border crisis”. If the US oligarchy wanted to stop refugees they wouldn’t starve people to death with economic siege warfare (“sanctions”) wouldn’t fund genocide, would not do regime changes, would not fund death squads etc.
But sadly, we love to blame victims and worship the oligarchy
“Nate being the dutiful Blue soldier…”
That Sonia Sotomayor would be asked to resign from the Supreme Court is shocking, showing no understanding how important her position on the court is for the Puerto Rican and Hispanic communities. Only days ago, I happened to watch Sotomayor play a part on the PBS cartoon “Alma’s Way.” The children were rapt, and I realized important Sotomayor was to them.
Sotomayor is an inspiration.
I understand how some might feel about her, but I couldn’t possibly agree: she is part of a corrupt institution. Perhaps I am too cynical and grumpy, but the credibility and legitimacy of all three branches of govt. as institutions, have shown to be corrupted. Of course, this depends on how one defines “institutional corruption”. It is much more complex than individuals or group taking overt bribes.
https://ethics.harvard.edu/lawrence-lessig-%C2%A0%E2%80%94%C2%A0-institutional-corruption
https://gould.usc.edu/why/students/orgs/ilj/assets/docs/26-3-Amit.pdf
While they are at it, they should all retire. The institutional corruption should be clear by now
Josh Barro?, Silver?
Whoever, the democrats advocate for, is just the better of 2 evils. Hows that working out for us?
“Sonia Sotomayor’s retirement is a political IQ test
Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three remaining liberal Supreme Court justices, will turn 70 years old in June, is diabetic and had one parent who died at a young age. There are some offsetting factors at work — women live longer than men, and Sotomayor undoubtedly has access to world-class health care. So I’m not going to pull out an actuarial table or pretend to precisely estimate her lifespan. However, there is clearly a chance that Sotomayor will die or become unable to carry out her duties before Democrats again control both the presidency and the Senate.”
— Nate Silver
Possibly because I am lacking the crude actuarial experience of the writer, I find this passage sordid and will long resent the writing of it. Yuck.