RBG conspiracy theories are alive (and she is too)

The right wing extremists still think RBG is dead. This is disgraceful.

Adding seats to the Supreme Court – a poll

I support adding additional seats to the Supreme Court. I don’t see any other way to compensate for the seat the Republicans stole when they ignored the Garland nomination.

NEW POLL: When provided the arguments for and against adding seats to the Supreme Court, Democrats support the idea 75-25 and independents support it 55-45.https://t.co/58C81WRl9A pic.twitter.com/3G3rChs6cQ
— Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) April 19, 2019

The Supreme Court could limit Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests

Supreme Court could limit #FOIA, curtail investigative reporting — By @CPJAmericas' @AASchapiro https://t.co/ZNUhlHhCOj
— Committee to Protect Journalists (@pressfreedom) April 18, 2019

McConnell’s impact on judicial picks

This is extremely important:

Obama left office with 107 open judgeships, many with nominees who didn’t get a vote or even a hearing. A SCOTUS seat was unfilled. McConnell was responsible for the 2-year effort that created these vacancies. https://t.co/6PZHjCazcm
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) March 29, 2019

McConnell, who is often mischaracterized as an institutionalist, has been willing to scrap Senate traditions/rules if there's a compelling ideological or partisan benefit (e.g. ramping up legislative filibusters, axing blue slips, and nuking SCOTUS filibuster & now debate time).
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) April 3, 2019

“We are going to move judges like they are on a conveyor belt.” —@SenateMajLdr McConnell@SenateGOP wouldn’t give Merrick Garland a hearing.

They took unprecedented steps to block Pres. Obama’s nominees.

Now they need to change the rules to force through Pres. Trump's judges? pic.twitter.com/XBWi0BChOb
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) April 1, 2019

Will the Supreme Court strike down or limit abortion rights?

There are lots of new laws that will give them that opportunity. With the new conservative justices, this is a real possibility. Polling shows support for Roe v. Wade but the far right doesn’t care what the public wants. The Trump administration has been very hostile to abortion rights. Trump and other Republicans lie about Democratic positions on abortions.

New state laws ban abortion before many women even know they’re pregnant!

Banning abortion before women know they are pregnant is absurd, unconstitutional, unscientific and cruel. We will fight these bans and protect every women’s constitutional rights wherever they live. https://t.co/SVwSLYmjBQ
— (((Rep. Nadler))) (@RepJerryNadler) March 29, 2019

When anti-abortion activist Janet Porter first introduced the idea of a "heartbeat" bill in 2011, she was almost laughed out of the room.

A decade later, GOP lawmakers around the country are rushing to adopt her signature legislation: https://t.co/nyUvYKlGhr pic.twitter.com/SxqeMX31Yx
— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) March 30, 2019

More state lawmakers are pushing "heartbeat" bills that ban abortion as early as six weeks into pregnancy in a bid to trigger a Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade https://t.co/Mdi03FZJ8T
— POLITICO (@politico) March 27, 2019

These 12 cases could challenge abortion access under Roe vs. Wade if the Supreme Court chooses to hear them https://t.co/e950IrTGPa
— POLITICO (@politico) March 27, 2019

🗣️ Keep abortion safe and legal. https://t.co/SeQqpiatdK
— The Democrats (@TheDemocrats) March 27, 2019

Make no mistake: These bills aim to ban abortion across the board and could threaten the lives and well-being of women everywhere. https://t.co/bfCjtSSVya
— The Democrats (@TheDemocrats) March 24, 2019

There are a lot of disgusting things that the Trump administration has done. This ranks very close to the top. https://t.co/tLjGjZctgr
— Janet Johnson (@JJohnsonLaw) March 16, 2019

The new federal abortion gag rule is egregious. Will SCOTUS stand for it? https://t.co/SfXGisuSDl
— Slate (@Slate) March 10, 2019

The Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill that would ban abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected. A fetal heartbeat can be detected as early as 6 weeks, before many women even realize they are pregnant. https://t.co/iZ6Ay47fH4
— The New York Times (@nytimes) March 8, 2019

CA, CO, CN, DE, HI, IL, MD, MA, MI, MN, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OR, PA, RI, VT, VA, WI (and D.C.): These are the states filing lawsuits this week to stop the Trump administration's gag rule on clinics referring women for abortion care: https://t.co/3khzXrTbCv #NoGagRule
— NARAL (@NARAL) March 5, 2019

Planned Parenthood, American Medical Association sue Trump administration over abortion "gag rule" https://t.co/ElQ3Pc2HwU
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) March 5, 2019

President Trump tweeted, "The Democrat(ic) position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth."

Both Democrats and Republicans agree that active killing of a breathing newborn is — and should be — illegal. https://t.co/pxkyBwOIrd pic.twitter.com/UD7h8GteQ5
— PolitiFact (@PolitiFact) March 4, 2019

Democrats say the GOP arguments are inflammatory and inaccurate, but Republicans are already seizing on the issue in their 2020 strategy https://t.co/OuDfYwhZ3J
— POLITICO (@politico) March 3, 2019

Fact check: Democrats don't support infanticide or medically unnecessary late term abortions. Meghan McCain is spreading Fox News agitprop designed to re-elect the president who routinely mocks her late father. https://t.co/ReiX5tfd0z
— Bob Cesca (@bobcesca_go) March 2, 2019

Don Jr attacks Dems over "post-term abortion" — something that doesn't exist.

"That's called murder. This isn't women's health care. If the baby is born, and it's alive, the woman is no longer at risk," he says. pic.twitter.com/TY4bkcetIq
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 1, 2019

Babies are rarely born alive after abortion procedures, and if they are, doctors do not kill them. These are the facts behind President Trump’s misleading tweet in the latest abortion battle. https://t.co/Jb4RVaj8fi
— NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) February 28, 2019

Court packing may be needed to correct Republican abuse

Republicans have trashed norms by blocking Obama judicial appointments, stealing a Supreme Court seat, and abandoning the blue slip tradition. There is no reason for Democrats to adhere to norms if Republicans won’t do it too. A drastic measure like court packing may be needed to offset the Republican abuses of the appointment process.

The steps that Republicans have taken to shape the Supreme Court over the past few years have led some Democrats to believe that it’s time to throw out the rule book and fight back. https://t.co/TrI9z5iNvn
— Mother Jones (@MotherJones) March 31, 2019

Democratic plans to pack the Court are terrible, but Republicans can't amend the Constitution to prevent it without their support. Here's an idea for a compromise – only inn @PostOpinions.https://t.co/No3tVvKvx3
— Henry Olsen (@henryolsenEPPC) March 22, 2019

The column above by a conservative admits Republicans may block any Democratic Supreme Court pick: “…
the decision in 2016 by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to not hold hearings on President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland, suggests that even a Democratic president could not successfully place his or her nominee on the bench if Breyer or Ginsburg were to step down while Republicans control the Senate.”

Sens. Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand said they would not rule out expanding the Supreme Court if elected president https://t.co/xRiyoTBEg0
— POLITICO (@politico) March 18, 2019

From the article:

“Expanding the Supreme Court would amount to a historic power play by the next Democratic president and Congress, requiring an intense legislative fight and the abandonment of many judicial and congressional norms.

But Democrats say that after Republicans blocked Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland and other lower court judges during President Barack Obama’s final term only to quickly fill those vacancies once President Donald Trump was in office, the party needs an equally bruising response.”

There is no longer any debate about whether Democrats must reform the Supreme Court. The only discussion is about the how. Term limits are a good step but we also must expand the Court's size.https://t.co/mbimN2zT3E
— Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) March 18, 2019

“It is time for the Democrats to drop the pretense that the judiciary is apolitical, and admit that no progressive agenda can be enacted or maintained without a drastic overhaul of the federal judiciary.” https://t.co/B7YKG8Ysco
— Pack The Courts (@PackSCOTUS) April 19, 2019

Is court packing a good idea?

Republicans stole a Supreme Court seat they used to install Gorsuch. Something must be done and court packing is worth considering.

https://twitter.com/alexburnsNYT/status/1103760225394454539

A conversation worth having. #packthecourts
Progressive activists push 2020 Dems to pack Supreme Court https://t.co/Fw409HsvB8 via @politico
— Carisa Cunningham (@carisac) February 25, 2019

EXCLUSIVE: Eric Holder says next Democratic president should consider adding additional seats to the U.S. Supreme Court https://t.co/8ARmJdwjG9
— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) March 7, 2019

Kavanaugh attacks Roe v. Wade

Those of us who are not Senator Collins knew this would happen.

Justice Kavanaugh’s explanation of his vote — using factual uncertainty about the law’s effects to justify subjecting women to the Louisiana regime while we learn more by using them as guinea pigs in a cruel human experiment — shamefully devalues women https://t.co/yxxZ8JcSfA
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) February 8, 2019

Kavanaugh lied; the Senators who said they believed Kavanaugh lied.

The fix was in from the beginning https://t.co/7PXulFATWy
— Dan Pfeiffer (@danpfeiffer) February 8, 2019

Hogue told me, “Susan Collins gaslighted millions of Americans claiming we were hysterical in believing that Justice Kavanaugh would vote to overturn precedent … His decision in the Louisiana case proves us correct.” https://t.co/iu1saBgs1t
— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) February 8, 2019

Literally no one believed that Kavanaugh isn’t a vote against Roe during his confirmation hearings, and it’s bonkers that journalism norms required so many reporters to pretend that there was real uncertainty there.
— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) February 8, 2019

As I wrote last August, all you had to do was to see what Kavanaugh was saying in public to know where'd he be on abortion. Susan Collins was either delusional or disingenuous in thinking otherwise. https://t.co/fCxRAYTd2K
— Jeff Greenfield (@greenfield64) February 8, 2019

Here's my piece. It is unclear how long Roberts will defend the right to abortion access, but he stuck his neck out tonight.

Meanwhile, Brett Kavanaugh is ready and willing to let states regulate abortion out of existence. https://t.co/hLPDAkNeC4 @Slate
— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) February 8, 2019

From @NARAL "It only took Kavanaugh four months into his lifetime appointment on the bench to prove that Susan Collins’ insistence that he would respect precedent was a complete lie." https://t.co/odpB4njTW3
— Ronald Brownstein (@RonBrownstein) February 8, 2019

Kavanaugh voted to ignore a Supreme Court precedent from *just two years ago* and let Louisiana make abortion effectively unavailable for many women. Susan Collins, still feeling vindicated?https://t.co/Zeqd1p8gV1
— Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) February 8, 2019

Read Justice Brett Kavanaugh's dissent in the Louisiana abortion clinic case https://t.co/wEESZN5sIW pic.twitter.com/MRNtbZMEmg
— CNN (@CNN) February 8, 2019

Supreme Court won’t let a Muslim have a Muslim religious official present when he was executed

This is bigotry by Alabama and it was reinforced by the Supreme Court. The man should have been allowed to have his iman there.

100 years from now, law students will read about this decision. It may be read alongside Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu, and the Chinese Exclusion Act cases. https://t.co/SwqM547yGV
— Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) February 8, 2019

For a majority that shows endless solicitude to religious claims from Catholics and Evangelicals, this is incredibly reckless. You would think they would bend over backwards to avoid even the appearance of religious favoritisms. https://t.co/5OLh6Omj0l
— Joshua Block (@JoshABlock) February 8, 2019

The Court was “profoundly wrong” to summarily reject this inmate’s “claim that his religious rights will be violated at the moment the state puts him to death.” If he were a Christian, Alabama would’ve let a minister of his faith be with him to the end.https://t.co/NQwm7LRQTv
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) February 8, 2019

Imagine the uproar if a white evangelical was denied the opportunity to have a pastor that shared his faith at his execution … https://t.co/H2Wv0ZgDeU
— Eugene Scott (@Eugene_Scott) February 8, 2019

The Supreme Court believes that the 1st Amendment only protects Christians. This is a truly shocking result in what should have been a straightforward case. Shameful. https://t.co/4f9ed2h0cl
— Jake Meiseles (@Jmeiseles) February 8, 2019

A Muslim inmate who argued his religious rights were violated because Alabama would not allow his imam by his side at his execution was put to death Thursday night https://t.co/Maf87trqiy
— CNN (@CNN) February 8, 2019

This is straight up one of the most bigoted decisions the Supreme Court has handed down since Korematsu.https://t.co/fN3p4kRVtn
— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) February 8, 2019

The Supreme Court may restrict abortion rights soon

Sad! This would be a bad decision by the court but hardly a surprise.

The Supreme Court may kill Roe v. Wade as soon as this week https://t.co/qSzo8Gj23T pic.twitter.com/A8AfDGEQp9
— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) January 28, 2019

The constitutional right to choose is under immediate threat. https://t.co/yQxNZHZb7N
— Slate (@Slate) February 1, 2019