“They’re all the same, they all do it.”
This lie, a refuge of scoundrels, is lately often spoken by Republicans to justify heinous, unpatriotic, and indeed treasonous behavior. As in, “You know that the Democrats would have done the same....” But history gives the lie to that claim. There is no evidence at all Democrats would have done the same. Indeed, no Democratic Senate in the history of the United States refused to consider a Republican president’s nominee nominated prior to the election of his successor. In fact, Democrats confirmed Rutherford B Hayes’s nominee, William Burnham Woods, even though he had been nominated after the election of Hayes’s successor, James Garfield. The Democratic-controlled Senate confirmed the nominee in six days.
@JAM. Republicans have a bad habit of claiming to occupy the low ground when the Democrats occupy it, too. Aside from representing a sleazy moral relativism, the argument is far from the truth. You, however, have no compunction making it. Perhaps you want to ask yourself why. If you can’t find an answer, you can get one from the political scientists Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann in their now prophetic work, “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks.” (They work for the conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute.) But I’ll bet you won’t bother to read it. The truth is too painful.
10
MoConnell's shameless action is like China's illegal gambit in the South China Sea: everyone will complain, but nobody will be able to stop it.
6
Hey Don't blame Mitch. Blame Queen Hillary who bigly lost to the weakest candidate she was pitted against.
DeNial is not a river in Egypt, folks
3
Payday comes when Ginsberg departs the court and a Federalist Society Judge replaces her for 40 years or so. That will be a sweet day.
1
And President Obama’s weakest moment.
Was he so convinced Hillary would win that he didn’t think it necessary to seriously and loudly challenge the Majority Leader’s blatant power grab? Why didn’t he go up to the Hill every day with his nominee and the press in tow demanding a hearing for Garland??? A significant part of his legacy was at stake AND his approval ratings were high. One of the presidents Obama admired was Ronald Reagan. Reagan, cashing in on his popularity, would have taken it to the people and embarrassed his opponents into doing the right thing.
It was one of the very few times I was deeply disappointed in Obama, and yes, we will all pay the price for decades to come.
16
For the last several minutes, I have tried unsuccessfully to summon the critical words necessary to express the indignation I experience when considering a carious specter that walks this earth, him being known as Mitch McConnell.
7
Let's no forget to thank bernie, jill stein and their voters for the thousands of voters that decided to stay home or voted for stein. For my part, i refuse to read, listen or watch the bernie clown. For stein it's telling to see the picture of her dining with our president putin (by the way i don't recall seeing that picture in any major media outlet before the election). It's also telling that the young people feeling the burn will be mainly the ones feeling the burns of gorsuch for decades to come.
7
Mitch McConnell is a political thug who has done terrible damage to the Senate and the United States through his obsession with keeping the GOP in power over doing good the country. He will go down in history as perhaps the worst majority leader of the Senate America has ever had.
14
“100 years from now, assuming the United States still exists…“
A hundred? Right now, if by the United States you mean something resembling a constitutional republic, five or six seems optimistic. When Barack Obama fears for the survival of democracy, what are the rest of us supposed to think?
5
How is it, exactly, that McConnell could be so confident that a Republican would claim the presidency? All evidence pointed in the opposite direction. Yet for nine straight months McConnell publicly counted on a Republican victory. Did he know something we didn’t know? And if, as looks likely, he did, what did he know?
7
Private sector unions,if they become too overbearing drive the employer out business or overseas. Both employer and union are motivated to reach sustainable middle-ground.
Since Abood vs. Detroit Board of Education,elected school officials negotiate with unions who may well have helped elect them...both know taxpayers are mandated to cover even unsustainable excesses.
1
I still don't understand why we as citizens, don't have legal recourse to force Gorsuch off the court and bring in the legally appointed Garland. How is it possible that McConnell was able to get away with this complete disregard of our Constitutional laws? I wish someone could explain it to me.
11
Maybe you should read the United States Constitution. It actually is a pretty short document written is pretty straightforward English.
.
When President Obama won his first term Mitch McConnell said openly to the press "I want this President to fail". At the time I thought there would be charges of treason brought against him. I thought for an elected official to openly want to thwart the will of the people who had freely and without any question elected their president was the most naked assault on our democratic system I had ever heard let alone coming from someone who has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. Nothing happened. He then went on to prevent Mr. Obama from selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia by violating our Constitution without impunity. I hope Neil Gorsuch is a man of dignity and integrity and that coming to his post as a result of so much illegitimacy weighs on his conscience and makes him a better jurist. Indeed I have a lot of hope that our institutions can withstand the attack of so much treasonous behavior.
8
I have prayed and prayed for God to smite down Mitch McConnell, but the timing never seems to be right.
6
Too bad he wasn't playing baseball that day.
3
100 years from now, assuming the United States still exists, historians that are honest will depict Mitch McConnell as one of the most unethical, immoral and polarizing figures in American politics. He started the march towards a total scorched earth political strategy when he conducted a secret meeting right after Obama was elected President, deciding that the Republican Party's first priority would be to make sure that Obama would be a one term President. McConnell's total obstruction, using the Senate filibuster a record number of times against every Obama legislative initiative, was a textbook case of putting party ahead of country. One reason why Trump is able to fill so many Federal judge vacancies now, is because McConnell also created a lot of judicial vacancies by either slow walking or blocking many Obama nominees, and of course stole Merrick Garland's seat on the Supreme Court after Scalia died. McConnell also refused to make a bi-partisan public announcement that Russia was interfering with our 2016 election, when he was approached by Obama and asked to do so. McConnell represents the worst in politicians, extreme hyper-partisanship, caring only about grabbing and keeping power by using any and all means possible, regardless of how unethical and outside the norms of political behavior.
22
Or when Gorsuchand the majority say that gay people don't deserve to be treated equally. Elections have consequences
1
Outrage and accurate arguments about the craven, hypocritical, cynical pollution of Mitch McConnell are absolutely useless sentiment if there is not the political will to tear him down and get him out of office. I defy any NY Times reader to go down to Kentucky and find a simple majority willing to vote McConnell out. I'd bet a donut you'll find a whole bus-load of proud union members who vote McConnell every time because (they think) he's looking out for them.
5
Mitch is one of the worst political jerk/scoundrel in our modern history. When was taking oath, he was having meeting with the right wing clowns to fail Obama's presidency. He did not think it was bad for the country but he was thinking the interest of his party. Then Mitch declared that his main job as a majority leader in US Senate to make Obama one time president (he failed to do so). After Justice Scalia's death, he decided that he would make sure that Obama's choice for SCOTUS would be ignored. He is such a hypocrite. Only "winning" by hook or by crook is his principle.
3
Mike: If you've read this far, you can see that your opinions have generated a very strong, rapid and almost exclusively negative response. Many of these are well thought out, detailed and logical. I truly hope you read them with close attention and with an open mind, although I find it quite unlikely that anyone who could author a piece like yours is willing to do that. But maybe you'll prove me wrong.
1
So you are sorry that a moderate liberal did not get that seat and that instead it went to a conservative. We understand. But stop blaming McConnell or any other Republican Senator for the political strategy of keeping a liberal justice off the court. You know that the Democrats would have done the same if the roles had been reversed.
The corporate media spent years blaming McConnell for having the temerity to state the obvious, that the GOP wanted to make Obama a one term president. Well, guess what, the Dems want to make Trump a one term president, or even better, an impeached partial term president.
Surely you know by now that the political stratagems go both ways, and both parties have used them to their respective advantages. So stop with the hypocrisy of berating McConnell for doing just what you would want Senator Schumer to do in a comparative situation.
2
Garland was not a "liberal" justice. Read about it.
2
I saw the headline and asked myself "as a politician did sleazy Mitch ever have a proud moment?" I couldn't think of one.
2
Can you imagine an American who did not dream to become the president of USA but wanted to be the senate majority leader. Senator from Kentucky's proudest moment was not choosing the nuclear option to get Judge Gorsuch in the supreme court but to have become the senate majority leader. It was also a proud moment for one of the smaller and poorer states with a big heart to have its senator become the senate majority leader. McConnell is successful in many ways even though he failed to do what he was trying to do which is make Obama a one term president.
1
How do agency fees strengthen a public union's ability to affect public policy but not affect a non public union's ability to affect public policy?
If the workers at Boeing wanted to petition the government to spend more on the military because it would mean more business for Boeing, isn't THAT affecting public policy?
2
Gorsuch is on the Court because of McConnell's political maneuver for sure. But it wouldn't have happened if it weren't for the Russians, James Comey, and the Bernie or busters, Jill Stein voters, and so-called "progressives" who just couldn't vote for Hillary Clinton because they bought into the right-wing and Russian propaganda against her and helped Trump win the election. Now we are stuck with a young Scalia-type, activist Justice for decades and the lower courts are being flooded with every right-wing activist judge Republicans can drum up. We already have a rewritten second amendment, money is speech, corporations are people with religious rights, reversal of much of the Voter Rights Act, etc. We can look forward to more of these activist decisions for at least a generation.
9
jas2200,
Or maybe they just didn't like her, hmmm?!
You seem to have forgotten the tens of millions, over half, that just didn't vote. Many of them, again, Dems.
The Clinton Coronation inspired few but those excited about "Her Turn!!!"
Once again the Democratic Party couldn't get out the vote.
Candidate, message, history, what have you. Dems are losing elections.
I suggest they change (a lot of ) something. Don't you?
A couple thousand more in a couple states and you'd be commenting on something else.
Lots of pointing fingers and casting blame.
Could be time for some self reflection and to check that mirror Kettle.
1
Yes Mitch got an itch and Mitch is consequential for procedure, not for substance; however, Mitch's itch was preceded by so much more.
There is additional background and historian Laura Kalman explained how former President Lyndon Johnson helped create a historically liberal Supreme Court and how former President Richard Nixon's efforts to dismantle it helped create that politicized nomination process we see today.
It is available on Minnesota Public Radio at this time and she aptly depicts the transition from the Earl Warren era to the Warren Burger era with great insights into the political calculus on both LBJ's and Nixon's part.
Intriguing story and she speculates on pivotal appointments, the upset of geographical distribution (the Minnesota twins, Burger and Blackman, and the four of five burroughs of New York city, sans Staten Island) and that Robert Bork was not the first casualty of the political process.
NOTE: Bork did keep the firing in the judicial branch at a time when to let the Executive branch do it would have been worse. it seems Bork may have taken one for the team.
Also, Harry Blackman, the other of the Minnesota twins, delivered Roe v. Wade.
1
Biden gave us Clarence Thomas and Obama gave us Neil Gorsuch.
Barry the Drone King is revered like a saint among Democrats, and Uncle Joe, architect of the Patriot Act, is considered a viable candidate for 2020.
Go figure.
We all must live with those moments.
3
The University of Louisville, Mitch's alma mater and home to some kind of ridiculous school named for him (where they study how not to legislate?), is in a heap of cow dung right now, athletics and the foundation. Whatever he touches is tainted.
3
I consider myself agnostic. Would probably be an atheist by now, but holding out on the hope there may be a hell in which McConnell and his co-conspirator Ryan will burn for all eternity.
7
Originalists like Scalia, Thomas, possibly Gorsuch remind me of those who defend the 2nd Amendment from any reasonable, sensible regulation of the war weapon, the AR-15, used to such grotesque and deadly aims. There is a causal relationship between the loss of union power, the Citizens United case, and the assault on economic equity, always a tricky propositionn. What in hell was the so-called Tax Reform Bill recently passed if not a gift for the plutocracy? As the economy becomes more automated, more jobs are destined for the loss column. Here we are as one writer said nit-picking over the dregs of workers' rights. Not their power, their rights. I have two degrees and am a certain age and gender and worked at a big university for under $15.00 because Texas is under the federal minimum. Lots of good things about the state: glorious sunsets, great bbq, great Mexican food, but other things--hm, not so much. Highest prenatal death ranking in the USA, no doubt due to our proximity to Mexico along the Rio Grande River where conditions economic and otherwise are not so great. How workers can exert any control over their lives if they do not have a fair employer is dicey. And yes, union control was corroded in many places as well. Can't we go for equity and balance? Do the right thing?
2
Merrick Garland was NOT a moderate. He was a Liberal jurist. How do we know?
--Obama nominated him
--Liberals were enraged that he was not given a hearing
--The NY Times laments that he was bypassed.
Garland was a Liberal--and thank god Republicans resisted the onslaught--to install yet another justice (like Breyer, Kagan, Ginsberg and Sotomayor), who do not respect the Constitution--or use it to guide their decisions. Bypassing Garland was an affirmation of the rule of law.
2
You are so wrong. McConnell flatly refused to fulfill his obligations by not even meeting with Garland. It does not matter what label you put on Justice Garland--the fact is that McConnell was derelict and continues to work to undermine the rule of law. He does what he wants because he can, and the Constitution and the Republic be damned.
7
Regarding the health of the ultraconservative Justices, I quote a Grook by Piet Hein:
I see and I hear and speak no evil
I carry no malice within my breast
Yet quite without wishing a man to the devil
One may be permitted to hope for the best.
4
As a reminder, "Justice" Alito has, in the past, gleefully stated "Stare Decisis" means what WE say it does."
There was never the slightest doubt that he was, and will be, a tool of the 1% for the entire time he remains on the bench.
Adding Gorsuch gave him the ally he needed to ensure we hurtle back to the 1800's at the speed of light.
What's next Justice Alito? Will you be overturning child labor laws?
2
Now, dues paying members, should (more likely when) Janus change the law, will be compelled to associate with and work on the behalf of the free riders, to provide services for free. Clearly that's somehow "better" than people paying for the work done by others on their behalf, said no one with a brain ever.
All right, once unions are stamped out once and for all, employees and workers need to come full circle and strike, on a national basis, like they did in the 1930s. Employer goons won't be able to bust heads like they used to. Corporations will have to listen and negotiate.
2
My only criticism of Obama is that he didn't fight McConnell on this.
3
McConnell is a radical who subverted the will of the Constitution, and changed how SCOTUS nominees will be processed, maybe forever. I'm sure the Rs won't mind if the Ds pull the same trick next time they're in power.
Gorsuch should forever be referred to as "occupying the Merrick Garland seat on the Supreme Court."
1
How incredibly sad. We wring our hands about the disappearance of the middle class and too many fail to remember how it evolved into being.
2
Obama needed to take this to the American people and dnc leadership. This wasn't the issue on which to say "Hillary will win and all will be well." This was worth going all the way and not giving up on. That he did not stains whatever legacy he hoped for; and leaves USA without an objective judiciary for a generation. Long enough to take down all the important stuff we are dependent upon: social security, EPA, public schools and voting rights come to mind.
1
Mitch McConnell, the Republicans and their financial backers play a zero sum game. That is just too distasteful for many centralist and liberal citizens regardless whether they are Democrat's or independents. You saw this especially in President Obama who's nickname no-drama was both well deserved and did not serve us well. McConnell and company aren't winning because of their overwhelming support among Americans, their winning because they see everyone else as their enemies to be defeated. The Democrats used to see the Republicans as their opponents and the opposition. This is changing now in the age of Trump but the game of zero sum take no prisoners politics isn't one they play well. Plus the money is mostly on the Republicans side and has been for a long time. Wealthy non-conservative individuals (with some exceptions) don't want to waste time and energy remaking the country in their image. The cost of not confronting McConnell's scorched earth politics is a judicial activism that will remake the country in the conservative / libertarian image. If that image is a bit too savage for you I suggest you learn how the Republican's play this game and act accordingly.
3
If new Justice Gorsuch is aligning himself with Justice Clarence Thomas then he is setting himself up to be the second dumbest Justice in American history. Clarence Thomas’s nomination by President George HW Bush was one of the most cynical and misguided ever. Fortunately he has been sidelined into basic oblivion by the Chief Justice who although a conservative must consider it an embarrassment to be in the same room with him.
2
Anybody would be really kidding with oneself , if they believe rowe vs wade will not be overturned by 2020.
I'm waiting for The Times' editorial on how states like New Jersey and Illinois should pay for the massively underfunded pensions and medical benefits for public employee union retirees. It was so easy to promise public employees pension and medical benefits that far exceed those available in the private sector. Who is going to pay for them? I know, the rich!
1
Actually for most of my working life public employee benefits and pension did not exceed the private sector. Not until the decline of private sector unions and the movement of jobs overseas did we see the private sector pay and benefits fall behind. As to pensions it would do well to remember that many private pensions were well funded and became targets for corporate raiders and hedge fund types who drove viable companies into bankruptcy and helped themselves to the pension funds while bailing out.
2
Why aren’t Democrats pursuing legal remedies against McConnell for doing this? Are McConnell and Gorsuch both exempt from impeachment? I think not.
1
Nearly all the comments are about McConnell and Obama. Mitch is obviously a paid crook. But, it speaks volumes that no one cares about what this means for public sector unions. The Right hates labor representation and the Left could care less about someone who is a union member and voted for Trump. Between this political climate and AI the middle class will be completely wiped out.
1
McConnell illegitimized the Supreme Court by not allowing Merrick Garland to go through the confirmation process. Any decisions which Gorsuch takes part in are invalid and will have to be vacated or revisited once the court is legally filled. The GOP chose to politicize the confirmation process, and because of that every court action thereafter is merely a political statement and not a valid rule of law. It’s disturbing that our nations highest court is now corrupted. I don’t care what Gorsuch says, he’s not a legitimate justice and his decisions will not be allowed in the future. He needs to be removed, by force if necessary.
1
I hope you use the language of "ultra-liberal" when you discuss the voting record of the 4 justices appointed by Democrats. They vote in a block more than the Republicans. Remember, it was the Chief Justice that defended the constitutionality of ObamaCare.
2
There are plenty of things that I must pay a fee or taxes for by law some of which I sometimes disapprove of. I do not like to pay for a bloated military that sometimes seems to have little purpose. I do not like that my Congress people can use my tax money to pay off sexual harassment suits. I do not like that my auto registration fees are so high. You get the point.
The question is can I withhold these taxes and fees because I do not want to go along with them? If people in a business or government agency can with hold common fees because of a dislike or just because they do not want to pay, who is to say that I could not do so in other situations.
The first amendment is great and must be up held, but there is a point where society breaks down when we no longer need to live by our social agreements. If the point of this decision is to destroy unions it may be that you man destroy society itself. Sometimes I feel like an anarchist, but this is going too far.
3
I'll bet very few folks have actually been Union members. A government worker (employee) without recourse (hire/fire at will) becomes a pawn in government "spoils system" job placement by the party in power. The Union preserves stability that Trumps (no pun intended) the wincing of good folks misled by "1st amendment" arguments. Truly there is going to be an Einstein level new hire that will not become an immediate replacement for someone whose work is steady and reliable. Shouldn't the non-union member who get Union protection when this happens pay for the ride? When the Union negotiates a raise, does the non-union employee not get that same raise? The argument against public sector unions is bogus. The truth is that an end to Unions makes corporations able to lower labor costs without organized resistance. The fact that Unions support Democrats is because that political party is more compassionate that the Republicans, but a large margin. Republicans believe in the law of the jungle: "Survival of the Fittest".
3
Thank Goodness We All Must Live With Mitch McConnell’s Proudest Moment
1
if public sector collective bargaining is inherently political speech, as the Court appears poised to rule, then several interesting consequences follow. One is that states could not bar such bargaining, as many now do, or limit its scope, as Wisconsin does now. Another is that unions could not be required to represent non-members, as all public sector unions are now required to to.
It also becomes true, as one of the amici briefs pointed out, that mandatory public employee contributions to pension funds would be contrary to the 1st amendment as well, as those contributions then fund businesses who spend money on political advocacy. It might even be that such mandatory contributions by private-sector employees would be considered compelled political speech.
Wouldn't it be ironic if a future liberal-dominated court used this ruling to restrict or eliminate the ability of publicly-held corporations to make campaign contributions or even to lobby?
9
Russian-Republican kleptocrats now control all three branches of the federal government.
Neil Gorsuch is an illegitimate justice seated anti-Constitutionally by treasonous Republicans.
Five-four rulings by the illegitimate Republican majority deserve neither respect, nor deference, nor obedience.
13
Sounds like more Russian interference.
If the Times wants to continue to take the side of public unions it must henceforth refrain from criticizing subway service or police shootings.
5
Don't worry, what goes around comes around in politics. The score will be settled at some point. Hopefully the republic will still be standing. And by the way Clarence, how's the chief justice's sexual harassment initiative coming?
6
That our Supreme Court tolerates a Gorsuch having been dropped into its midst by Mitch McConnel throws into question their role as the arbiters of fairness in this country. Would not an objective observer agree that Mr. Garland should have had a chance at confirmation, and that the process by which we ended up with Mr. Gorsuch was unfair, perhaps even unlawful? What kind of "Supreme Court" simply shrugs and accepts this???
7
A Supreme Court that follows the law, and not the political wishes of some social activists. As Barack Obama said, elections have consequences. Obama's election, and the elections of Republicans to control of the Senate.
"As it turned out, Justice Scalia’s death only briefly slowed the march of corporate interests that have sought for years to protect their huge profits and kill off the last remnants of organized labor in America."
Apparently the NYT editorial board will stop at nothing to chalk any policy it disagrees with up to "corporate interests," even when the case solely concerns the PUBLIC SECTOR.
Lazy journalism at its worst.
3
It is about corporate interests, who do you think is financing this? The corporate war on "all" unions is in its final stage with the attack on public unions. This is about economic / political power and always has been. So yes it's about killing off the ability for workers to organize collectively and advocate for their rights. This has never been acceptable to the corporate world and they have labored a long time to put the working class back in its subservient place.
3
Neil Gorsuch is a loser. He got onto the Supreme Court illegally and now he'll prance around on his back legs any time his masters tell him to. He has nothing to offer this court in way of dignity, decency, fairness, or honesty. A total washout and a sellout.
12
McConnell is financed by his wife's businesses. Some of those businesses have dealing with Trumpkins' mother Russia. Methinks McConnell is also dancing to Putin Piper's tune.
Everything else I think about him is unprintable.
13
This is how the game is being played now.
Chivalry, fair play, bipartisan has been abolished.
The rules are now meant to be gamed. Push to the limit and sometimes over.
If you get caught and are wealthy, white, and male. You get a "cut that out".
From Patriots football, to Kasey Kahne in NASCAR, or Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs, our current Pres. in his marriage ('s) to the DNC in its primary's.
Rules are meant to be pushed. Rubbing is Racing. Politics is a dirty game.
The GOP has taken the gloves and decorum off for decades now.
Does the DNC have the same resolve?
Ready to play dirty and much around with the pigs.
Time to game the rule books and hopefully set our nation on the proper path once more. (or finally...)
I say take ruthless control and set thing right with that power. Then pass laws closing those loopholes and restrain that power as it was meant to be.
End Citizens United. End the massive $$ in lobbing. Empower the CFPB. Raise the Soc. Sec. Cap. M4A. Rein in the MIC. Automatic Voter Reg. etc., etc.
Yeah, one can dream right?
I think my invest in pitchforks and Tumbrel Carts will pay off, before any of this happens.
3
It's the evil of it. One party rule.
3
We know how that one went, from 2009-2011. Back when Obama told us that elections have consequences. Maybe you should have listened to Obama.
2
Dark days in the White House, Dark Days on the Supreme Court. Another person appointed who has no business sitting there carrying out the extreme right wing agenda. Merrick Garland would have been a real person.. Mitch McConnell will be voted out soon but only after the cancer he placed has spread. McConnell you will lose it all by supporting and enabling don the con....It will be good not to look a his face ever again, just Ruin the country and move on,,,
3
This devastating blow to the American constitution, this illegal power grab ..... how is it any different than when some small foreign country is taken over by some renegade colonel? I mean, such blatant power grabs doesn't even happen that often these days! But Mitch did it in the United States of America! This guy should have been thrown in prison, but no, he is hailed as a hero! Very disgusting!
6
Obama should have appointed Garland when Congress was out. Apparently this was an option. Everyone thought Clinton would win.what a disaster and what a disgrace McConnell is
3
Pronounced left-wing bias has become the requisite calling card of the NYTimes since an election has not gone their predicted route last November. The appointments on the Supreme Court made during the Obama Presidency are hardcore ideologues, underqualified, and embarrassing.
The corruption of the unions in California as political fundraisers for the DNC must end to have fair elections. They play a much larger role in influencing elections and are more subversive than any imagined Russian interference.
3
Obama's appointments were moderates by any objective measure as were many other supreme court nominees in the past. Democrats don't tend to submit extremists to the court, neither did Republicans in the past before Reagan. It started with Bork and has been that way ever since. Only judges acceptable to the Federalists society are now put forward by the Republicans and you can't find a more rigid dogmatic conservative group than them.
1
My fantasy is that the Confederate States once again ask to secede.
This time we let them and the take the other Red states with them.
I would have to move but it would be worth it.
7
Sometimes separation and divorce are the best options.
Let it happen.
More likely, California will secede.
1
The mere fact that Gorsuch accepted this position is alone enough to show that he lacks the integrity and morality to hold any position on SCOTUS.
Any person of honor would have declined, saying 'it's not right'.
5
Unions are no longer a major factor in the private sector anyway. They did an important job in the years after the start of industrial revolution. That work is now largely done. The big problem is public sector unions. In Illinois the public sector unions have elected shills for several generations. The shills repay the favor with absurdly generous benefits, heavily “spiked” pensions and numerous public holidays. Any employee who is disciplined has the union threaten management and is more likely to get promoted (out of the office) than fired. Definitely time to end this cycle of greed that is backrupting many states. Cutting public sector union’s stranglehold is a good first step.
2
"... Neil Gorsuch, who we’re supposed to believe represents the “voice” of a citizenry that preferred Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly three million votes."
In 1992 57% of Americans voted against Bill Clinton. That is, 58,848,271 people voted against Mr. Clinton. Mr. Clinton received 44,909,806 votes or 13,938,565 LESS than the other candidates.
Mr. Clinton went on to appoint Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer.
No republicans now or during his administrations questioned the legitimacy of Bill Clinton's presidency. No one questioned the legitimacy of Ginsberg or Breyer's appointment to the Supreme Court.
OK, Mitch McConnell is swamp monster. He along with Patrick Leahy, Orin Hatch, John McCain Chuck Grassley, Richard Shelby, Thad Cochran, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Jim Inhofe, Patty Murray and anyone else who has been in the senate since the early 90s or before are the poster children for term limits. There are not enough characters permitted in Times comments to include the list from the house.
Let's fix that.
Stop trying to de-legitimize the 2016 election. Hillary lost... twice. She couldn't beat a guy named Hussein who hadn't served one year of one term in the senate before he thought he was qualified to be president. She then lost to a buffoonish, bloviating philistine with zero political experience.
She's a loser. Get over it.
6
Well said.
2
This hijacking of democratic principles nay, human and humane principles MUST stop. Out with McConnell, Ryan, Pence and let us see the rump of Trump ... these perfidious mountebanks must be gone ! The amount of money they are making can't even be spent ... disgraceful ...
4
It's as if Harry Reid's decision to employ the nuclear option went into a historical black hole. It's hard to know whether McConnell would have stalled the Garland vote had Reid not gone that way, but McConnell's choice was a direct result of Reid's stupid and short-sighted hyperpartisanship. And now Democrats basically can't do a doggone thing with Trump's lower-court nominees. It's also as if the Democrats in the Senate were unaware that their partisan decisions can have partisan consequences, thanks in part to the NYT editors who supported Reid's blatant stupidity.
Once Trump is impeached or resigns under a cloud it will be time to impeach Gorsuch and all other judges appointed by the illegitimate president.
3
So much for democracy in the USA. This country is now under a dictatorship brought about through deceipt, lies, gerrymandering, and “deals”.
5
I can’t even read this article. Taking away my vote was the most disgusting thing republicans did in the Obama era.
2
One of the worst political acts in our country's history.
To publicly humiliate the first African-American president in this way, with out history of slavery and Jim Crow and everything else, was awful, ugly, and not to mention unconstitutional.
Mitch McConnell will be remembered forever for this act and this act alone. Un-american and borderline treasonous.
6
When McConnell leaves government he will be remembered as a partisan hack who cared more about his party and his donors than the American people or the constitution. A shameful little man.
6
Remember when Barack Obama said that elections have consequences? "I won, you lost", get over it. No compromise was a feature of the Obama presidency too.
1
Rinse, repeat:
Strong unions used to be the kingdom belonging to white males, and now they aren't. McConnell's tactics were designed to maintain a sector of the public which will not vote GOP, the white power party --- and stick it to that Black President.
It is clear what Gorsuch is... and progressive voters who should have gone with Clinton have been bemoaning their terrible choice in not voting for her in many ways including Grouch.
Once dummy is removed as President in 2020, the Dems better rethink how they will push through another candidate to counterbalance the truly frightening triad of Gorsuch, Thomas and Alito.
morally bankrupt cheating behavior.
1
History is going to dump Mitch McConnell's reputation on the same fetid landfill as Fernando Wood's.
1
When will the sick-outs begin?
2
Even FDR was against unions for government employees. The NYT is at least consistent. Consistently wrong on every issue.
The thought of McConnell's coup still burns me badly.
3
The popular vote seems to continue to be tossed out to make at point. The fact is the president of this country is elected by electoral votes, each of the several states being allocated a fixed number of electoral votes. The simple reason, California, or New York, do not determine the outcome of a presidential election. Again, the electoral college determines the winner; the founding fathers of these United States in my humble view got it right, even though the current chief exec is, also in my view a moron (including the Secretary of States adjective)
I'm a proud Kentuckian, or was, until Mitch McConnell did a chameleon act right before my eyes. I know him, have voted for him, have met him and his wife, and can hardly believe his obstructionism to President Obama, our Nation, and in particular to Judge Garland. One must also consider his actions to block dissemination of the evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election. It appears clear to me that the change took place with the color green. It is my opinion that Mr. McConnell is a traitor to our Nation. I know that is strong language, but what else can one conjecture? He is the person primarily responsible for the sad situation we find ourselves in today.
9
The simple fact is that the United States is no longer a democracy. With gerrymandering, corporate money in politics, the dominance of groups such as the NRA, right-wing dominance in radio, TV and much of the media, the lack of representation of D.C. in Congress and Republican obstructionism any idea that we are actually operating as a democracy is simply hollow. And I blame the Democrats nearly as much as the Republicans. Why didn't they try to get rid of the electoral college when the had a fighting chance? Why didn't they fight the outrageous gerrymandering of the last decade? Why did they not fight for Congressional representation for Washington, D.C. (whose 681,170 residents, larger than two states, have taxation without representation) which would have tipped the balance in the Senate? The Democrats are pathetic. The Republicans are playing hardball, the Democrats are wandering into small delis in Staten Island asking where the stadium is.
2
"Why didn't [the Democrats] try to get rid of the electoral college when the had a fighting chance? "
This is not a simple vote of the Congress. It requires a Constitutional Amendment.
The empty red states are not going to give up their overrepresentation in the Electoral College or the Senate until people who care about democracy become the majority in those states.
The solution is for young Democrats to move to the red states. Just 100,000 or so more Democrats in Wyoming and 2 Republican Senators would be replaced with 2 Democrats.
3
No fan of Gorsuch or a supporter of Republicans, but the voters did not prefer Hillary Clinton by three million votes- that is a lie.
If you add up the vote totals from Election day, most Americans voted fro someone other than Hillary- people like myself, who voted for Gary Johnson.
2016 Popular Vote:
Trump 62,980,160 Johnson 4,488,931 Stein 1,147,050 McMullin 728,830
Over 69 Million Americans said anyone but Hillary. 65 Million voted for Hillary. Stop advancing the lie that she was the choice of the American people by popular vote. Besides, we have never elected a President by popular vote. Finally, almost all of that extra margin Hillary raked up was in 2 states- NY and California.
5
"Finally, almost all of that extra margin Hillary raked up was in 2 states- NY and California"
This Fox talking point is getting old. If you discount Texas, Clinton wins both the popular vote AND the Electoral College.
4
Texas is the second most populous state., that is a huge if.
If Bernie would have been the nominee, Trump would not be President right now.
The polling showed that before Iowa. Ms Clinton racked up many of her delegates in Deep Red Southern states she had no chance to ever win.
Ms Clinton is loathed in much of the US and only Hillary could have lost to Trump.
Finally, I do not watch Trump TV (Faux Newz).
1
Democrats need to stop whining about getting our clocks cleaned by McConnell and do something about it. We remember when Schumer and the Democratic leadership caved in to Republicans just a month or so ago about DACA, saying that McConnel "promised" to bring the issue to a vote if Dems would vote for a continuing resolution on the budget. Dems are like Charlie Brown, constantly making the mistake of trusting the Republicans to do the right thing when they haven't done the right thing for forty years now. Get off your high horses Dems and get down in the dirt with the Republicans. Contest every election in every red state, get out the vote, and register people to vote. Stop worrying about unions that are perceived as already being powerful enough, don't need your help and are primarily interested in self-preservation.
1
One can only hope that the constitutional traitor McConnell will be viewed as such someday in the future when America comes its senses.
It's obvious folks, the brakes are broken and we're halfway down the mountain side with ocean in clear view for the plunging.
Where is a sensible WWII vet to smack America upside the head and bring it to its senses. Partisan money has won, generations have been betrayed and America's corruption has reached it's epoch.
All I can say is register to vote and look at policy, not ads.
4
Yes. We all must live with this, including
Hillary for insisting on running with a dismal approval rate
The Democrats for nominating Hillary
54% of the women, who voted for Trump
40% of the Hispanics who did the same
All the ultra liberals who decided to stay home or vote for candidates with no chance
Good 'ol Mitch was the only one behaving rationally.
It's time to change the terms of the justices. It is clear that life time appointments do not do anything to prevent their political behavior and the are appointed specifically because of their politics - nothing else.
18 years is plenty and ensure bad judges move out within a reasonable time. It is offset from the election cycle. Put in a clause that a presidents appointment is automatically confirmed if not voted on within 30 days of submission. That will ensure corrupt politicians cannot game the system.
Besides that it would be great to get rid of bad justices ASAP (ie, Thomas - need anything be said?!?! And Gorsuch is well known to be a mediocre, lazy justice and has no business being in a position where we want someone who can think instead of just "read the statute' any 6th grader can do that)
2
I employ a general rule of them when it comes to interpreting certain types of statements by GOP politicians. When they are at their most partisan is when they love to claim they are speaking for the American people. Or, when they presuppose some incredible pipeline to "what the American people want" or what they feel. Of course this is nothing more than what they want want, what they are saying, and not the American people. Who died and put the GOP in charge of speaking for or divining what it is that the "American people" want or have to say? The arrogance of this particular rhetorical practice I find one of the most insulting and offensive.
Putin need not have lifted a finger to undermine American faith in democracy and our Constitution. The legislative tactics used by Mr. McConnell and Mr. Ryan, based upon their racism towards President Obama and the American majority that elected him, set the stage for the corrupt Trump administration. Fortunately, what goes around comes around, so one way or another they will have to face their shameful corruption. I hope some way can be found to remedy the destruction of our American future at the hands of these three GOP villains
3
Gorsuch was born into and carefully nutured in the Republican kennel. Here are some things that should happen:
.. In argument before the Court, individual lawyers should challenge Gorsuch’s legitimacy — remind him and the nation how he got his robes.
.. If Dems regain power in 2020, expand the Supreme Court to 13 seats.
The alternative is a 30 year trump court. Say goodbye to women’s rights and workers rights, and say hello to guns, guns and more guns. Also watch all Civil Rights eviserated. Dems of course are too passive and fractured to consider action stronger than hand wringing. McConnell was brutal in denying Garland a fair shake. Time for Democrats to show they have some energy and strength too. But I doubt I will live to see it.
First why should we live with what McConnell has done? Why should we millions more of us voted for Hillary instead of the bigot. Also it would appear the bigot and his party colluded with Russia to win the presidency. Again I ask why should we abide by any decision this court hands down.
If it was up to me I would prefer to see democrats bring the government to a halt. Don't vote for anything the bigot or his party asks for no matter what. That is what McConnell did when Obama became president. Of course the democrats will not do that they will fold just like they did over DACA etc. If a democrat ever makes it to the presidency again the right will pull the same play again.
All of this, of course because Hillary lost.
And as President Obama once said elections have their consequences.
Do you really want to accept Clarence Thomas ,it’s not his color I object to it’s his treatment of Anita Hill. or Mitch McConnells
Pick for leader of the those decisiding laws of our country?
Is it ok to destroy democracy through Citizens United?You know ,pour Corporate Money into elections so corrupt humans can own congress?Does Money determine how well you can think?Does saying we don’t need the voting rights law anymore make it true?
The Conservative part of the high court is now unresponsive to the majority of
the country.I reject their attempts to control us ,as citizens.Humans who walk,talk and think about basics ,health care,shelter,food,clean air and leadership not steeped in ignorance and filth,and corruption.
2
When the demos get back in control of Congress, and there’s a Supreme Court vacancy with a repub President, they will do the same thing.
Heck, if the democrats take the senate they should refuse to hold hearings for any Trump appointee. Why not, that seems to be the new rule - do whatever you can legally get away with.
2
Bottom line, businessmen are the gods of capitalism, lowly workers never deserve decent compensation which would enable them to have a good living standard. OR, the businessmen, inventor or entrepreneur gets a good idea, or backs a good idea, or borrows capital from lenders to start a company, but cannot realize the vision without employees.
Americans are woefully ignorant of history. PBS' The Gilded Age, for non-readers, tells the level of brutality companies and state militias and even Federal troops unleashed against strikers. Businessmen will always pay the least amount of wages that they can get away with. How much is work worth? Who deserves a decent life? Until unions forced a reform, only management had incomes that led to a good life.
The destruction of unions since Saint Reagan is history repeating itself. yet another attempt by capitalists to have all laws passed in their favor. Just like government needs checks on the power of the three branches, so does business need checks on supreme greed and lack of caring about their own workers. And the attacks on government unions are despicable as well. How would Americans like their lives if unsafe working conditions returned, their kids were working for pennies 12 hours/day, and you were beaten, fired, or murdered for trying for a better life.
The anti-union people are elitists. They put out propaganda, false, just like tobacco, oil, and drug companies. The US has a history of hustlers preying on the gullible.
2
Of the current axis of evil - McConnell, Ryan and Trump - the Speaker is by far the worst. He's smart, cunning, ruthless, and has done more to destroy democracy in the United States than any politician in recent memory. Preventing the Garland nomination was unconscionable. It was anti-Constitutional, and it's impact, with the selection of the uber-conservative Gorsuch to the SC, will be felt for decades.
Every day I wonder how the leadership of an entire party can be so backward, so indifferent to the needs of the country (not to mention their constituents). The Republican party is the definition of a sociopath - "a person [or party] with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience."
1
The thing most lacking in our politicians is today is any even remote devotion to the simple idea that you should do the right thing. This is true on both sides of the aisle, though not true of everyone, at least not to the same degree.
I do understand that in many circumstances discerning "the right thing" can present a quandary.
But this Garland business is not an example of a quandary. There was just the naked desire to preserve power that required doing the wrong thing, so Mitch did the wrong thing. That's all, and we all know it, even he knows it but he cannot speak the truth.
There is nothing in the spirit or the letter of the Constitution that supports refusing to consider the President's nominee for the Court, with the spirit being more the point here than the letter.
The true spirit of this move was simply I'm going to do the wrong thing and invent fantasies justifying it as the right thing, because doing so profits me and my tribe, never mind that it does not respect the Constitution, nor respect all of us in the Union.
Now if we just did the right thing - and this goes for all the politicians, red and blue, and all the attack dogs on the internet, red and blue - perhaps we would not have the train wreck we now have.
You may think this naive, but if you do it is you who doesn't get it, and it is you who is going to destroy us.
And all you politicians - please stop acting like you are never wrong and you never lie. It is boring to tears.
2
Here is the crux of the problem, unions "have also become a potent organizing tool in Democratic politics." The double standard the Times editorial board chooses to ignore. When it is the Christian church driving politics the Times calls for an end to the Constitutional protections the Church enjoys. When everyone, including the Times, recognizes Unions as being aggressively politically active why would there be an expectation of continue protection?
Thanks for the reminder of the cynicism of the Republican party. As if we needed it. Trump will continue to destroy from within whatever protections of the poor and middle class that he can.
1
Not much consolation, but when histories of this era are written McConnell will life in infamy.
1
The darkness of the GOP's America is at hand. It won't be easy for any of us going forward. Good luck, everyone.
1
"President Trump will be in power until 2025 at the latest." 2025. That thought alone makes me shudder.
I have started to hear rumblings from the blog-o-sphere that if the Dems take the House and the Senate later this year and then the Presidency in 2020 (while retaining their congressional majorities) that Gorsuch should be impeached. Sort of a political version of an eye for an eye - one nakedly politically hostile act responded to with another nakedly political act. The better angels of my nature scream "No! No! No!" but that little devil on the other shoulder whispers "Do it! Do it! Do it!"
Supposing sanity were to prevail in the United States (it could happen, couldn't it? Before today, did you ever imagine you would see the sort of IN-sanity--the resentment, the selfishness--that prevails now?), Mueller made a clear finding that the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians to steal the 2016 Presidential election, and the clear winner of the popular vote, Mrs. Clinton, were to be installed in the White House. It stands to reason that ALL acts of an Administration established by treason would be undone, including the appointment of Mr. Gorsuch--no?
1
Mitch McConnell's blocking of Merrick Garland was an undemocratic, unconstitutional power grab. Neil Gorsuch is a usurper and not a legitimate justice of the court. In my opinion, any 5-4 decision with him in the majority is void.
1
Public sector unions are a cancer on this nation. They've destroyed our education system, they've completely corrupted all of our law enforcement agencies, they've crippled our ability to in any way improve our infrastructure and systems. Politics is about representation of and accountability to constituents. Public sector unions are accountable to no one. The original purpose of unions was to allow employees to band together to present a united front toward abusive and exploitative management. There is no "management" role opposing public sector unions, only Democrat legislators giving and getting favors. Public sector union pensions will eventually bankrupt every state in this country. They need to be dismantled and outlawed. If putting Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court can help take a step toward accomplishing this, it will be an historic win for the country. We need to remove the criminals and the corruption from our government. I don't understand why Democrats, the champions of good, effective government, still support these egregiously corrupt unions. You're destroying your credibility and throwing away your integrity.
It's sad to have to hope he does not have a long tenure on the court....
1
No matter what the courts rule or say, or what the Republican politicians claim, some of us still maintain that Justice Gorsuch is an illegitimate Supreme Court justice. Some facts cannot be changed, including his lack of legitimacy.
3
Instead of nominating the most liberal justice he could imagine, Obama negotiated with himself and pick a seemingly reasonable centrist who had been praised by gopers in a clear attempt to appease conservatives
When will democrats learn that appeasement "a la Chamberlain" does not work with the new conservnazi republicans?
Another example of why our democracy isn't. For McConnell to decide that he alone would override the 65,915,795 million Americans who voted for the currently sitting president is to make a complete mockery of democracy.
1
The fact that the Supreme Court is even considered partisan denies the concept of it as being any sort of judicial arbiter.
If justice is politicized we join hands with every other banana republic.
The whole of our country as well as the rest of the world loses when bigots determine the law and it appears Mr McConnell is not a humanitarian.
I thought SCOTUS represented the Constitution? The citizens are “represented” by elected leaders who have the ability to make and change laws.
Finally, the Editorial Board responds to the most disrespectful event in my political memory, the refusal of the Republicans to abide by the legal precedent to seat a SCOTUS member during President Obama's remaining year in office. The deplorable act lacked a rational foundation, as evidenced by Mrs.
Clinton's plurality, and angered and divided Americans, leaving only a long-awaited election cycle for resolution. We will vote, the depth and breadth of which will astonish the nay-sayers who violated our collective contract.
Thank you to the EB for reminding us all that the ends do not justify the means.
2
NO FREELOADERS!
If union workers don't want to pay this fee, then they absolutely should not benefit from the then "political dealing" of contract negotiation. Let them fight for there own raises and benefits as individuals exercising their First Amendment rights. Let them see how well that goes. It's the exact reason we have unions.
I have been a member of two different unions in my life; supermarket checkout worker and police officer. At the supermarket, I was able to get increased hourly pay if I worked on a Sunday. As a police officer I benefited from negotiations over my 20 years of service. I also lost a benefit. COLA; cost of living adjustment was removed from our retirement benefits. Go figure, shortsightedness at its best! But I do live with it, as I also reap the benefit of paying for my health insurance as if I were still an employee. This provides me with great savings, at this time.
So, some good and some bad. But, the relatively small amount of money I paid in my dues over the 20 years has served me well.
If Mr. Janus doesn't want to contribute, then he should not be allowed to reap any benefit the union could provide.
Mitch McConnell not only blocked the Garland appointment, but by also not approving hundreds of lower federal court appointments in President Obama's administration he is shaping these courts as well. There really should be some form of punishment for this. The Senate did not do their job, at their leaders behest. It's just so wrong.
2
Firstly, I am not an American but I would like America to be great again so I will start with self evident truths.
The surviving Republican lawyers responsible for Heller must be impeached and charged with crimes against the state.
The 2nd amendment is based on the Bill of Rights first passed by the House August 24 1789.
The fifth article reads
A well regulated militia, composed of a body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be shall be compelled to render military service in person.
The dictionary defined militia as the nation's military and arms as weapons of war.
The 2nd amendment is simple basic English saying the nation has a right to draft citizens into its military but exempts Quakers and others whose religious beliefs prohibit them from taking up arms from serving in the military.
Scalia and his Republican cohort violated their oath to uphold the constitution and whether they violated their oath deliberately or because of ignorance can only be determined by putting them on trial.
Johnson's dictionary makes clear militia are government military and arms are weapons of war and the People is a collective name for the State.
Getting fair apolitical competent justices on the Supreme Court would be a good place to start a healing process. Justice is desperate for her blindfold.
1
The characterization of McConnell's ploy as cynical conveniently omits reference to the fact that judicial selection has been grossly political from The Founding when John Adam's Midnight Appointments inflamed the political process and led to the case of Marbury v. Madison in which the court dared not grant Marbury the relief to which he was entitled for fear that then President Jefferson would refuse to obey the Court's mandate, as well as FDR's attempted Court Packing Plan to populate the Court with Justices willing to rubber stamp the New Deal.
Neil Gorsuch is unqualified for the Supreme Court, and should resign, if he loves his country and respects the law. The American people spoke when they elected Barack Obama as their President, choosing him to nominate justices during his term. Under the law, Congress has an obligation to confirm nominees who are qualified, regardless of their politics. There was no question that Merrick Garland was eminently qualified. Today's Republicans do not respect that not everything can be written into law. Following unwritten, unwritable standards of fairness is essential in a democracy. Knowing this, Neal Gorsuch should have refused the nomination, asserting that he would be happy to be considered after Merrick Galand's confirmation hearings, which, he could have noted, would surely have resulted in his confirmation. Gorsuch knowingly stole Garland's seat on the Supreme Court, undermining its legitimacy.
2
"Now parked for life in the seat where Judge Garland should be sitting is the ultraconservative Neil Gorsuch, who we’re supposed to believe represents the “voice” of a citizenry that preferred Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly three million votes."
Two problems here. First being "where Judge Garland should be sitting." The NYT does not and should not decide who sits on the Supreme Court. The Constitution is clear; that power belongs with the Senate. Rather, the NYT could say that Judge Garland should have been given a confirmation hearing. Nominees should not be guaranteed a spot on the Supreme Court.
Second is the reference to Hillary Clintons popular vote victory. Both sides first priority was to win the election, not the popular vote. It is entirely plausible that had Donald Trump chosen a different campaign strategy that he would have won the popular vote. However, that wasn't the first goal. By implying the superiority of the popular vote to the electoral vote is like to imply that the winner of the NBA is not the first to win 4 games, but rather who scored the most points in combining the games.
If the employees felt there was value provided by the union, why wouldn't they pay their fair share? Why must it be forced upon them? Again, the dems think people need to be "taken care of" by our government. Doesn't work that way.
Left unaddressed by this editorial is the tension inherit in government employees electing their employers. It is disingenuous not to recognize the corrupting potential of this political influence especially when consolidated by mandated union representation of employees. Until and unless better safeguards are implemented to address this issue, fair share dues will remain a compromised means of addressing the concerns of government, employees, and the public.
Our Court tells us that the Founder's believed that compelled speech should include the ultra-wealthy's right to pervert elections. Our Court tells that the Second Amendment means something so extreme that it seems more a dystopian gun industry's marketing plan, than anything the founders could have wished on us. And now our Court will likely find that compelled speech means that organized workers cannot pool money to influence elections; that right is reserved only for the ultra wealthy.
In a world where "third-way" autocracies -- rule by political autocrats and economic elites -- are growing, our Court seems seems blind to risks of concentrated power in the hands the extremely wealth, and completely opposed to finding meanings in the Constitution that foster representative democracy, equality and safety.
2
"Compelled speech?" What is it when corporations whose stock is part of my 403b, or whose profit comes from my patronage, spend unlimited money to push candidates and causes I oppose? (There's no transparency to what they are doing.)
If the Justices want to reverse a precedent, let them reverse Citizens United.
2
And don't forget. Near the end of the 2016 Presidential campaign a number of Republicans in the Senate said they would not vote on Hillary Clinton's Supreme Court nominations for her entire term. McConnell's proudest moment is completely at odds with the office he was elected to. An enduring scandal.
1
We are stuck in the mud on this one. Why? Because embedded in Justice Sotomayor's reasonable assertion as to why, politically, Republicans want unions to go away is the tacit political reason as to why Democrats want unions to stay:
"But the true goal of this litigation strategy has never been to protect workers’ speech rights; it is, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor rightly said, “to do away with unions,” which not only make life a little harder for the world’s plutocrats, but have also become a potent organizing tool in Democratic politics"
And by extension, to make it a little easier for Democrats to win elections.
We're stuck in the mud on this one because it's no longer, centrally, about worker advocacy.
1
As an Associate Professor at NYU, I must turn over almost 2% of my salary to the United Auto Workers, even after I opt out of the blatantly political portion of their dues. The UAW has nothing to offer university faculty in terms of either training or certification, and is no better at writing suitable labor contracts than the University itself.
Voluntary unions are fine, but no worker should be required to join one. New York needs a Right to Work Law for both public and private establishments.
2
Oops -- I'm actually an Adjunct Professor at NYU.
Most right to work states allow people to opt out of dues, but require the union to still represent those that opt out. I say if you opt out, you opt all the way out. Otherwise you are just freeloading.
Mitch McConnell has made it clear he only cares about power and ideology. He does not care about governance (see the ACA debacle) or bipartisanship. Is it really brilliant to break something?
Here is what has been bother me since the election last year: How/why was Mitch McConnell so SURE that the Republicans were going to win the election?? I mean, most people believed that Hillary was a shoo-in. So, why would McConnell want to wait for HER to appoint someone who would most likely be even more liberal than Garland? Fishy, right??
2
I like and appreciate unions. My dad was a lifelong union member; I've been a union member, in fact, I always join one if there is one. Nonetheless, if a person doesn't want to join, and furthermore disagrees with the union's tactics and policies, he shouldn't be forced to join and pay dues.
Yes, we are all forced to pay taxes. But union dues ain't taxes: Apples and tomatoes are both fruits, but I don't wanna eat tomato pie a la mode or have apple butter on my pizza instead of tomato paste. I'm funny like that.
My final verdict: The dissenter should not be forced to pay union dues. Yes, he should pay, and other union members should work to convince him that the union is his friend and that he is a free rider, although the last statement is biased or fraught with negative freight: name-calling your opponent or loading the dice: Are you still a disgusting free-rider?
If the goal is worthy, we should fight fairly and above-board to win it. The end never justifies the means.
P.S. I loathe agreeing with Conservatives, but I think they have a point here. Truth before party.
P.P.S. I realize that my argument sounds hoity-toity, but as a graduate of an American high school, I'm not sagacious enough to convey my point more adroitly.
Our reasonable bipartisanship was dealt an opening blow when Sen. Harry Reid got rid if the filibuster that was in place for many years. West Virginia Sen. Harry Byrd, Dem, warned that this could lead to severe problems if the Dems lost but no one listened. This act has been one of the most consequential (infamous), negative act of the last 50 years.
Funny how everything on the Right is dumbed down to money. Speech equals money. Gives weight to the old saying about knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing. Kind of like power is more important than ethics or character.
Can't help asking: If Judge Neil Gorsuch is truly such a strict constructionist in the tradition of the much Republican praised Antonin Scalia, why has he not denounced the unconstitutional nearly year-long denial by Republican Senators to give President Barack Obama's nominee Judge Merrick Garland a hearing?
2
Unions support political parties that support them. Union members are not inherently leftists. If Republicans were favorable to unions, then they would get union support.
Supporting McConnell's move is simply the Republican principle that Might Makes Right.
I wonder how many supporting McConnell's dereliction of duty would expect to be able to put off their work 9 months because a new boss was coming in, or if they are the CEO, accepting that someone refusing to deliver that report because you were stepping down in 9 months?
Also it's easy to tell "originalists" are lying. If they support the 2nd amendment as currently interpreted which is to say as if the framers never wrote words "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," they can't be originalists.
Originalists are simply projecting their thoughts and desires into the Constitution, rationalizing their beliefs in much the same manner that people will scour the Bible to find words and passages that support their beliefs.
1
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Senator McConnell do no more than to invoke the so-called Biden Rule?
As for Judge Garland, Republicans had no difficulty confirming him to the Court of Appeals, where he'd be constrained by the Supreme Court, but his jurisprudential record was well to the left of what they found acceptable for appointment to the Supreme Court itself.
Bear in mind that Justice Anthony Kennedy is probably the most consequential federal employee, including the president. His decisions do more to determine how we live our lives than many things Congress or the president manage to achieve. That is what Republican senators had in mind in blocking the Garland appointment. And probably what then-Senator Biden had in mind too at the time.
1
We would not support any company having a monopoly on who gets to work, and what wages are. Yet, here we are, demanding that public employee unions get exactly that power. I'm a member of a union, and my union routinely abuses those who have little recourse. See, I'm a teacher. My union has almost complete control of primary and secondary education in California, and has done such a miserable job that more than a thousand independent charter schools exist in California.
Fundamentally, trade unions are a social good, opposing the power of corporations. However, government unions are not, as there is no balance to their power. Consumers can chose different companies, but governments are clearly not a balance, so moving is the only way to chose against their abuses. That, certainly, is not accessible to any but the rich.
1
I find the argument that this is a First Amendment issue to be utterly laughable (workers shouldn't be obliged to fund "political bargaining positions" with which they don't agree becasue it blunts their exercise of free speech).
Well, if they don't agree then they should say so, no one is stopping them from speaking up in unions meeting but the majority vote prevails in those meeting.
Let me carry this argument one step further. I don't happen to agree with a single thing that Trump and Tillerson say to our allies like Canada and Mexico. I don't agree with the things that McConnell and Ryan put in their legislation...yet they still collect taxes from me to implement their cockamamie scams...isn't that an infringement on my First Amendment rights? I don't have a choice about those taxes yet I'm paying for political positions with which I do not agree.
2
The theft of Obama's nomination and the issue of public employee unions are two separate things. The former was the sleaziest, most brazen act of partisan politics in my long lifetime. I'm not a lawyer, but I think it went against both letter and spirit of the constitution, making it a crime. Does anyone have any doubt what the Republican reaction would be if a Democratic Senate tried the same move towards the end of Trump's term? Be honest.
The latter is something for the courts to decide.
1
The next Democratic nominee for president should make a vow to refuse to enforce any 5-4 decision of the Supreme Court in which Gorsuch is in the majority, on the basis that his vote is the fruit of a poisoned vine.
The only way that the Republicans are going to stop these tactics is if the Dems are willing to match them.
For the record, a few quotes from Mitch:
"One of my proudest moments was when I told Obama, 'You will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy.'"
Of course, he neglects to reiterate the above when he remembers his quote from 2017 "Apparently there's yet a new standard now, which is not to confirm a Supreme Court nominee at all. I think that's something the American people simply will not tolerate."
1
A young teacher with student loans, considering starting a family, and looking at his or her meager salary, is tempted to not seek membership in the local union. There is a box on the deductions portion of their pay agreement. "Yes or No, do you want us to take dues out of your already tiny paycheck." Our society will never pay public school teachers well enough to be able to check the"yes, I want to make even less" box. Without fair share, teacher pay will continue to lag behind other professions, hammering another nail in the coffin of hopes to attract quality individuals into teaching. Mr. Trump's push to arm teachers has to be reconsidered here. Do we really want to arm people who choose to spend a small fortune in money and years in school only to make less than many people who don't go to college. It might be smarter to hire security guards rather than teachers to carry guns around in school, since you will be able to pay the the guards more, and thus employ the brightest and the best employees to protect our "precious" children. I know what you're thinking, and I'm pretty sure the stories about the Florida public-school teachers running towards the sound of gun fire, while armed law enforcement people huddled outside protecting only themselves, were just fake news. Thankfully, many wealthy Americans will continue to send their kids to private schools, where the school is not mandated to serve potential trouble-makers, and school shootings are extremely rare.
1
Can't understand why Justice Ginsberg didn't retire 4 years ago. She has had a long career, but her legacy will be a young justice on a court packed with conservatives. Can't help but feel that it was a selfish decision on her part.
His proudest moment?
Or maybe it was when the combined intelligence community summoned the relevant heads of our government to a classified briefing to inform them of Russian meddling in the 2018 election.
Mitch, after hearing the information presented by more than a dozen agencies declared, nothing to see here. And if what you've divulged to us goes public, we'll, the GOP, denounce it as a Hillary campaign dirty trick.
The election is over. Donald Trump won. What say now, Mitch?
Party above nation.
1
I wonder if the Court will equate union dues with the tax subsidies the NRA gets for being a "social welfare organization" when they've had a full-time legislative agenda for 40 years.
Not all taxpayers want to subsidize the NRA, but there you have it. Go union.
1
It was very bad form for McConnell to have invoked the Biden Rule on Garland's nomination. At the very least he should have held hearings and held a vote.
A good strategy would have been to have postponed at least the floor vote until after the election, since if Hillary had won, Garland would have been a "lesser evil" for the Republicans than the likely alternatives.
1
What are the chances that Justice Gorsuch will resign in the near future, citing the dishonorable path on which he arrived at the Court?
Chief Justice Roberts, I understand that this thought laps into politics, but what do you think of Sen. McConnell's actions in blocking President Obama's nominee without as much as a debate and vote?
Should the court consider the constitutionality of his action. Justice Gorsuch, of course, would have to recuse himself.
Where, I wonder, would your vote and opinion arrive in this case?
1
"Let’s pause to recall once again what did happen"
Yeah let's pause. Democrats, in their infinite wisdom, decided to run possibly the worst presidential candidate in modern electoral history, whose personal brand equity had been so tarnished and deteriorated (however unfairly), with a track record that consisted of significant blunders (e.g. The War in Iraq) and who was practically the epitome of everything people hate about DC. And in doing so, they effectively decided to throw away the Supreme Court for another 30 years.
Above and beyond the merits of the case at issue here, is the perfectly legal ability of Congress (and the Majority Leader) to upend the rights (and in fact, responsibilities) of an opposing administration, to fulfill those obligations for which it was elected. Nothing will be done in the current Administration, but once Democrats return to power, my hope would be that a future Mitch McConnell (of either party) will be unable to get away with the kinds of shenanigans exemplified by the shameful Judge Garland episode.
What does this say about our sanctified constitution? Isn't that the most important question? A senator goes willfully against the constitution by not letting the President pick a supreme court justice and there's no punishment or way to enforce the rules. this would seem to risk the very basis of our democracy. why not just throw out the whole thing and let mitch McConnell become dictator? Something needs to be done to strengthen the constitution before some authoritarian guy just decides to tear it up.
2
Partisanship may explain some things but it will never hide the fundamental racial meanness which will forever shadow Majority Leader McConnell. His pledge to destroy Obama's role in American history will be remembered together with his embrace of Trump as decisive steps in the sabotaging our Constitution.
1
Mr. McConnell has been a disaster for the United States economy, our democracy and our decency. After holding the Obama administration hostage for 8 year resulting in a historic small number of meaningful legislation being passed, he brags about that success and the fact that "compromise" is no longer the way to legislate. This man along with Trump republicans will do anything to take care their narrow constituency at the cost of the greater United States. To say that every proposal for the greater good is a threat to our freedoms (gun restrictions as an example) is just a rouse for taking their money and running and too bad for the majority of the populace.
1
I have never been a union member and they do have issues, however, it is so amazing and naive of people to ignore what the Republicans are really doing with these kind of actions. The unions essentially created the middle class in America and now the Supreme Court with the help of the Republican Party will ultimately destroy it. Far too many have been hoodwinked into thinking "right to work" legislation and similar laws gives workers choice, yet, in those states(almost all Republican) that have implemented it, all it has done is drive down wages and benefits. The hypocrisy here is beyond the pale.
Along with other low wage countries like China and others, in NAFTA, Trump constantly complained about all the lost jobs going to Mexico primarily because of very low wages and benefits, yet, while the goal should be to raise Mexican workers wages and benefits, instead, with decisions like this, all it is going to do is further increase the profits of corporations while systematically drive down American workers incomes, benefits levels and standard of living closer to those of Mexico!
When are Trump supporters going to finally realize that when it comes to his claim of helping American workers, all this is really designed to do is ultimately make things worse for them, not better.
1
Constitutionally there is no limit to how many Supreme Court Justices can serve at one time. When (or if) the Democrats get control of both the Senate and White House in January 2021, they should appoint the 10th and 11th Supreme Court justices. One to counteract the Gorsuch appointment and the next to get the one vote majority that was denied in 2016.
While I profoundly disagree with what McConnell did, I admire his effectiveness. Why can't the Democrats be as effective?
Also, where was Obama during the mid-terms (2010, 2014)?
These are rhetorical questions. Obama made no apparent effort to demonstrate party leadership.
1
Because what McConnell did was profoundly wrong.
4
If Trump world implodes, Judge Gorsuch should resign. The election was tainted to a large degree by foreign agents. It calls into question his legitimacy.
And the Court will be disgraced.
4
Mitch McConnell and a large portion of the Republican Party (including POTUS) have become the “domestic enemies” that the Founding Fathers warned us about.
5
Clarence Thomas committed perjury during his nomination hearings in order to get on the Court. Impeach and convict him when there is a Democratic president and the favor will be repaid.
4
I do not agree that we must live for decades with an illegitimate justice on the bench. Gorsuch was imposed on the Supreme Court in a fraudulent manner. As soon as the equally illegitimate stranglehold of the Republicans on government is broken he should be invited to resign or, should he decline to do the decent thing, he should be impeached.
5
In what may become one of the people's darkest hours for 30 or so years its time to make sure people vote from here on out to counter the Court with a WH and Congress that stands and acts for the welfare of all the Ameican people.
“Proudest” moment or most despicable? I choose the latter.
2
Wasn't McConnell's refusal to allow a vote on Judge Garland unconstitutional?
3
Gorsuch owes his position to his mommy, The former EPA administrator (who was ousted for corruption). His primary agenda as a judge is to bring back ultra right wing and religious ultra fundamentalist "values" to the country . He has always been known to be mediocre, with amateurish, even absurd judicial opinions. But he badly wanted to be an SC Judge so his mommy ensured he got appointments and talked him up at the usual right wing gatherings. Right wingers are always happy to have an unthinking, naive person in positions where they can be manipulated, so, voila, Gorsuch for SC was a perfect fit.
3
Who paid the justices to rule on Heller, Citizens United and McCutcheon ( among many others)? We need to know. Now..
2
In 50 years, when the US is fully a Russian-style oligarchy, we should remember that Mitch McConnell did more than any person in modern times to cripple our system of government. He institutionalized nonstop intransigence for partisan gain and he stole Americans' right to run our government the way we see fit. His actions over the last 10 years are nothing short of disgraceful, un-American and selfish. My hope is that history remembers him as the awful villain he is.
5
I am very thankful that McConnell had the backbone to stand up to Obama.
1
The GOP pretended to believe that it hated deficits, then exploded them.
Add another phony "belief" to GOP deceptions: activist judges.
3
"Against long odds, Mr. McConnell won."
Hmm. Odds? Maybe McConnell was already aware of a thumb on the scales . . .
1
It was not a cynical ploy - it was a political gamble that paid off. The risk was minor - Garland may have been a moderate in Democrat's eyes but on issue after issue he would have voted in lockstep with the liberals on the court. His voting would have been no different than any far Lefty judge from California that Hillary would have appointed.
Three cheers to Mitch for having the guts to make a move that has done more to protect free speech, religious liberty and economic freedom than any single decision in recent memory.
1
If the 77,000 voters who gave Trump his electoral win in Pa., Michigan, and Wisconsin thought for a second about the Supreme Court, Hillary would be president.
Or if the 600,000 third party nihilists didn't throw their votes away........
Or non-voters were smart enough to care....
Instead, we are now living a daily nightmare.
1
Maybe you are living a daily nightmare, I'm not I support most of what Trump has done so far. Dismantling the nightmare I lived through for 8 long years.
Almost every action taken by the republican party seems to lead to the same objective, the death of democracy. From putting church before State, voter suppression, limiting civil rights for minorities, women and LGBT persons, regressive taxes, punitive labor laws, inciting racial division and xenophobia, attacks on the free press, criminalization of African and Latino Americans through a phony war on drugs and a massive disinformation campaign, it all seems to have one purpose - to destroy democracy.
1
Mitch McConnell should be prosecuted and sentenced to 10 years for his part in stealing this seat on the court.
3
Mitch McConnell didn't win against any long odds. He won because spineless Democrats did nothing to oppose him. McConnell knew (and still knows) all too well that the Dems will fold like a cheap suit when presented with any tough vote or issue. The only long odds when playing with the gutless stand for nothing Dems is the very very long shot that they might actually decide to stand for something and stand their ground. And McConnell knows the odds of that happening are always about 1,000,000 to 1.
Beyond the 40 years of conservative voting we can anticipate from the illegally seated Justice Gorsuch, it is fair to assume that in an election decided by 70K voters spread over three states at least that many voters “came home” to the GOP knowing a Supreme Court seat was at stake. For Republicans, control of the Supreme Court for a generation swung the election. For Democrats, that opportunity was not enough to offset their Wikileaks-stoked anger over emails and the Clinton Foundation.
I am so sick of the Democratic Party showing up at a major league stadium prepared to play t-ball. I’m tired of being outplayed.
3
Gorsuch is not a legitimate Justice. Never will be. He cannot be allowed to remain in his position until he's an old, even more embittered specimen of humanity.
2
When Mitch McConnell became majority leader he clearly stated that he intended to use that position to ensure GOP control of all three branches of government, to thwart not just the Democratic Party but democracy itself. That the executive branch, controlled at that point by Democrats, let McConnell‘s refusal to bring Obama’s last Supreme Court nominee to a vote before the Senate stand rather than, say, have him arrested for malicious dereliction of his Constitutional duty, appalls me almost as much as McConnell’s crimes of omission and commission. I believe that working to eliminate GOP majorities in the House and Senate is the most important next step in resisting the fascist, pluto-kleptocratic juggernaut. But I wish I had more confidence in the Democratic Party.
I haven't read all the comments but the author missed a principal point as to the outcome. Justice Kennedy is the real linch pin in the decision .
He voted with the conservative 3 the first time and from his remarks from the bench will do so again.
Perhaps the most consequential result of the Trump "victory" is the stolen SCOTUS seat. We will suffer for many decades because of the chicanery and immorality of Mitchell, Putin and Trump.
Still, dear New York Times editors, give the senate majority leader credit for CONSISTENCY. Mr. McConnell has repeatedly declared that he would NEVER NEVER NEVER schedule hearing or allow a confirmation vote for any SCOTUS nominee made in the 2020 presidential election year. Or at least that’s sure what it sounded like he said.
Regardless, as senators Grassley, Hatch, Cruz, and Graham will be quick to remind: any SCOTUS vacancy that occurs after February 13, 2020 should rightfully be made by the president elected in November 2020. In fact, that’s what each and every Republican senator believes—just ASK THEM.
Hashtag: No Vote No Hearings Twenty Twenty
We are done. When a SCOTUS seat can be stolen on the basis of representing the "people's" wishes in an election, and that election is LOST by 3 million votes, the system is done. The corruption is complete. And there is clear and reasonable arguments to actually support that it is rigged and certainly does not reflect the people's wishes.
Justice Alito is a disgrace. His role in Citizens United, his lies about its possible impact and the empirical results of that decision are clear proof he is a disgrace and a political hack.
The Supreme Court, like Congress, withers away on corruption, oligarchy, political partisanship and incompetence. All leading to an authoritarian Executive Branch.
The table is set. Dinner is being served.
2
your bias clearly shows in this quote: "As it turned out, Justice Scalia’s death only briefly slowed the march of corporate interests that have sought for years to protect their huge profits and kill off the last remnants of organized labor in America."
your attempt to cleverly mix apples and oranges by interjecting "corporate interests" when the issue at hand is ONLY public employers who have NO profits is deliberately misleading and provocative. For Shame!
If the public employee unions are so great, their members should be happy to pay the dues. "Free riders" will never, ever be as common as "forced riders".
1
I've scrolled thru a couple of pages already and do not see anyone challenging this AMAZING ! prediction - "President Trump will be in power until 2025 at the latest"
It doesn't have to be this way.
If the Democrats ever managed to win both Senate and House with a veto proof majority, they could, without a Constitutional amendment, change the Supreme Court as follows: Each new President appoints two new SC justices per term. Only the 9 most recently appointed justices can vote. All justices, as the Constitution stipulates can SERVE for life, but they don't all get to vote.
You will say this will politicize the Court. The fact is, the Court is already the most purely political branch, in the sense that each Justice's vote can be predicted on any case with 95% certainty based only on political bias. Cases are prejudged. And since these justices are unelected, they are free to vote their prejudices for life. They do not call balls and strikes; they make up the strike zone with each new case.
All this takes is the power of numbers and a will to move boldly, two things Democrats have been sorely missing.
Politics are a dirty business, and the Republicans are just better at it right now. Blocking Garland was a masterstroke by Republicans in Congress. That one action gift wrapped 20% of the electorate to the Republican candidate. Even if the candidate was a complete dotard, a large bloc of voters were going to go Republican because of the Supreme Court vacancy and abortion.
My Catholic parents are single-issue voters, just like many others in their church. Neither voted for Trump in the primaries. They didn't like Trump in the general election, and they don't like him now. But they both voted for him because of abortion.
It's not just Scalia's replacement, either. As I'm sure you all realize, Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer are all 79 years old or older. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are quickly approaching 70. In a four year term Trump could end up nominating FOUR justices to the Supreme Court. If he got reelected (*shudder*) he could end up nominating SIX.
That's why Trump can run the federal government into the ground, drive up deficits, sell of national parks, eliminate protections for consumers and the environment...even claim he'd stop an active shooter unarmed! It doesn't matter. In hindsight, Pro-Life voters still would have chosen him over Hillary.
1
McConnell was the organizer of the disgraceful holdup on President Obama's Supreme Court choice, but the sycophants in the GOP Congress went right along with him. Where were the "brave ones" then?
1
Mitch McConnell brought the American idea that money is everything to its perfection.
1
Here too, sadly, we have a situation where many union members helped move this to the critical junction it now stands. Mc Connell is vile, there is no doubt. But how many union members have consistently voted for Republican representation on the local, state and federal over the years. Too many, unfortunately.
1
After we get a new president and Democratic majorities in Congress, we need to change the Supreme Court nomination process. The law should state that Congress must act on a nomination within 60 days, or forfeit its "advise and consent" powers, allowing the nomination to proceed. Simple and fair, and prevents another Gorsuch fiasco.
2
I'm not sure what I think of this Union case because I have mixed feelings about unions. But I'm glad to see so many people focusing on McConnell and his seditious acts. I feel we waste too much time on Trump and his juvenile antics when the real threat to our democracy is coming from McConnell, who has been showing blatant disrespect for democracy long before Trump arrived. As for Gorsuch, no matter what one thinks of his character or record, he will always be tainted by the fact that he occupies a stolen seat. How can you serve justice when you knowingly occupy a stolen seat?
Well, in about 5 more years I can retire. I am a public school teacher in the Philadelphia area. I have the benefit of union membership. I wish every worker in this country had the same protections. Because of my union, I have safe working conditions, a pension, health benefits and someone looking out for my interests so I can look out for my students' interests.
I pay my dues and I reap the benefit. Why should someone get the protection and the representation of a union for free?
1
My grandfather was a doctor for a coal mine in Illinois and my father used to tell me how, during the company/union battles of the 1930s, he had to sleep with a .3030 rifle under his bed.
I wonder if the union hating Republicans ever consider the extent to which their anti-labor, pro one-percent policies risk taking us back to the union busting days of yore.
3
It's time to come off this phony narrative. The Senate had every right to consider Barack Obama's judicial nominations, or let them die. That was its Constitutional right, and that's what it did. I, for one, am glad. So did many Americans who voted for the Constitutionally elected President of the United States, stressing that the Supreme Court was their priority. It was mine: I had no interest in the warped policies of Barack Obama reaching out for the next forty years. If you wanted to ensure a Left-wing, "Democratic-majority" Supreme Court (which is itself problematic, since supposedly we want "nonpartisan rule of law" judges, not political folks) then you should have elected HRC to the White House. But, to borrow your words, "Oh, right. That's not what happened."
2
I have been saying for many years that the two worst people to ever happen to our government (besides Trump) are Newt Gingrich & Mitch McConnell. They removed civil discourse & have shamelessly lied and obstructed. I never understand why, when people talk about how broken our system is, those two names aren't front and center. They are both disgraceful and should be shunned by the rest of us. They have no place in our political discourse now. They should be ashamed of themselves, but they don't have that muscle. All one can do is hope that history will treat them appropriately.
2
McConnell's action was not a "cynical ploy" but a totally logical move. If he had done anything else, it would have been idiotic.
Maybe there was once a time when Justices just interpreted the Constitution objectively, without partisan or ideological bias. Maybe there was a time when President just nominated people they saw as good legal minds, with no thought as to how they would vote, just assuming they would do a good, objective job.
Those days are gone. Justices are partisan actors, who perform as a super-Legislature, imposing their views through whatever "interpretation" of the Constitution reaches the results their partisan, ideological desires call for. A President carefully selects Justices who will do just what the President and his party wants.
In this reality, who gets on the Supreme Court is a pure partisan legislative decision, and it would be crazy for members of one party to allow the President of the other party to stack the super-Leglislature with his partisans. McConnell did the right thing, and even if he had allowed a vote, it never would have overcome a filibuster. The Democrats would have done the same thing if roles were reversed. They would have been nuts not to.
After the democratizes retake congress and eventually the Presidency they need to act to neutralize the theft of democracy that the traitorous McConnell perpetrated on this country.
This can be accomplished by legislation to expand the Supreme Court to 11 members rather than nine, and appointing two young ultra liberal judges, This is the only way to take back our judicial system from tyrants.
1
My faith in our country was shaken to the core when the Supreme Court stopped the Florida vote count and appointed Bush as President. The Court rocked my faith again with the Citizens United Ruling. McConnell set fire to what few shreds of trust I had left when he refused to honor Obama’s right to fill an empty seat on the Court. This is no longer that shining light of democracy I believed in. It’s a dumpster fire and the noxious fumes blow all over this country and into my soul.
3
Corporations are people according to this republican supreme court. So they are surely going to give the corporations what ever they want because that's what they do. The Supremes hang out with these rich guy's, they give speeches at their fancy dinners and even go hunting with them. The fix is in and "we the people" and not the "corporate" people will feel the effects for the rest of my life. Republican judges, politicians, dog catchers or whoever are going to let corporate America kick us little guy's around. Always have...always will.
1
McConnell's action was not a "cynical ploy" but a totally logical move. If he had done anything else, it would have been idiotic.
Maybe there was once a time when Justices just interpreted the Constitution objectively, without partisan or ideological bias. Maybe there was a time when President just nominated people they saw as good legal minds, with no thought as to how they would vote, just assuming they would do a good, objective job.
Those days are gone. Justices are partisan actors, who perform as a super-Legislature, imposing their views through whatever "interpretation" of the Constitution reaches the results their partisan, ideological desires call for. A President carefully selects Justices who will do just what the President and his party wants.
In this reality, who gets on the Supreme Court is a pure partisan legislative decision, and it would be crazy for members of one party to allow the President of the other party to stack the super-Leglislature with his partisans. McConnell did the right thing, and even if he had allowed a vote, it never would have overcome a filibuster. The Democrats would have done the same thing if roles were reversed. They would have been nuts not to.
1
No honorable person would have ever accepted the Supreme Court seat that should have gone to Merrick Garland. Mr. Gorsuch has a stain on his name for life.
2
I would love to see Barack Obama sitting on the Court.
Payback is an American tradition, and I think McConnell's refusal to honor our first African American President's choice for the Supreme Court will bite the Republicans for decades to come. There is no reason to care about fairness, or what the other guy wants, all that is important is power.
If, say, the Democrats gain the House, and in a few years, the Senate and Executive Branch, then they can just appoint the most hard left people they can find. Fair is fair. Chief Justice Obama!
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
2
If the Senate majority goes backs to Dems in 18 they should hold any SCOTUS vacancies open that come up during the last two years of Trumpos presidency.
Same logic that McConnell used turned on the GOP.
Watch the hypocrites howl.
1
Gorsuch should be removed by a future Democratic legislative majority because he is the possessor of stolen goods. He might understand that legal concept.
Also, McConnell's action two years ago to block the Garland nomination is all the proof we need to know that the authoritarian GOP is completely in bed with the Trumpissimo movement.
2
"President Trump will be in power until 2025 at the latest..." Maybe. But do you really think the 22nd Amendment is off limits to a Republican congress that behaves as though Democrats are a greater threat to America than the Russian government?
1
Will Gorsuch’s appointment be null and void once Trump/Pence are indicted and convicted of treason? It seems to me that all of trump’s appointments should be null and void the minute he is escorted out of the White House.
4
Subverting democracy will be his legacy.
Obama nominated TWO justices to the Supreme Court. Trump nominated just one. Perhaps we should call it the Obama court rather than the Trump court?
I know that the NYT would have preferred three justices nominated by Obama and zero justices nominated by Trump.
But those of us who care about balance think that 2+2 would be just right. America IS a divided country and when a country is so divided, each half deserves representation on the Supreme Court.
1
An utter usurpation of democracy by McConnell and the GOP. Any other interpretation? Go back to civics class and learn a little something about fairness--and America.
1
When the democrats take control of Congress, they should impeach Gorsuch, on grounds that he never would have had an opportunity for the seat but for Mitch McConnell's unconstitutional refusal to consider the sitting president's nomination.
1
Gorsuch will always be an illegitimate Justice and his votes on the court will always have an asterisk noting he dishonorably took a seat stolen from a sitting President by a corrupt politician not representing the citizens of this country but his large Oligarch donors.
1
Thanks, Obama! for giving up just like Gore did. Don't nag voters. Don't complain about how awful Trump is. Don't chide voters. Don't scaremonger. Just. Fight. Fight like all our lives depend on it, Dems. And asking me for chump change with your hand still out to Goldman Sachs just doesn't cut it. Show us what you got, and cut the graft.
How about this: have two separate wage scales for union and non-union. If you don't want to pay dues, then you make non-union wages. Voila!
1
"Had the seat he occupies been filled by Merrick Garland, it’s unlikely the case would have been brought at all."
This demonstrates why it was so important to keep another leftist politician in a black robe away from the SCOTUS. We need look no further than the repeated, nutty decisions on immigration to see the consequences: the more bizarre the decision, the better the bet that it was penned by an Obama/Clinton appointee. (Of course, to the result-oriented NYT, those folks who make it up as they go along to arrive at leftist results with which the NYT agrees are "moderates", whereas those who actually pay attention to the text and history of the Constitution are "ultraconservatives". Good thing we have the 1A out there protecting your right to publish drivel.)
The SCOTUS is probably the reason DT is POTUS. Probably most conservatives weren't enamored of him, but were scared stiff of the existential threat to the rule of law posed by HRC. As above, those were not imaginary fears. Leftists simply don't grasp the judicial job description, which is NOT to arrive at Politically Correct results, but to apply the existing law. That's an inherently "conservative" process; naturally, the left has no use for it.
Here, what part of "no law" is unclear? Being compelled to join obnoxious, inherently political private entities as a condition of public employment seems a 1A no-brainer. But, to you, the 1A cannot be permitted to interfere with massive Democratic campaign contributions.
2
We all failed as citizens by not staging mass protests Washington, D.C. when the Senate refused to vote on Merrick Garland. President Obama should have ordered AG Loretta Lynch to arrest Mitch McConnell and all senators who blocked a vote on Merrick Garland for breaking their oath to support and defend the Constitution. Democracy dies in silence and Fascism grows in its stead.
10
Your comment illustrates why we must never allow "progressives" to gain power again. You advocate political prisons - gulags - what you advocate is not democracy it is tyranny.
The Democratic Party must put all of its money in voting McConnell out of office
6
republicans like McConnell have stolen our democracy from us. With the help of the FOX-induced comatose voters.
The repubs that voted to keep this deserve their fate. The rest of us should revolt and try to destroy this abomination.
Seriously.
5
Seriously? In a democracy sometimes positions and people you advocate lose. Just because you lose doesn't mean democracy was taken away from you. Go ahead and revolt - that is why my second amendment right is so necessary.
Old dried up Mitch is a disgrace to the Senate. He nor the Republicans represent me. They are a bunch of time-warped people still living in the 19th century feeding the rich as they get richer and even denying the middle class affordable health care. The Supreme Court has gone entirely political and they should be ashamed of themselves. (Thanks to Mitch and his ignorant and sleazy minions). Trump is a world class liar, abuser of women and he's not only ignorant but lazy. He's a big sad joke to the world. The problem being that none of this is funny. All of this is tragic.
7
First page of today's NYT Paper, an article titled: "China Leaps to Front of a New Authoritarian Era." Very interesting article and to the point. Now, a new suggestion for future article to be printed on the first page of the NYT: "U.S. Leaps to Front of a New Authoritarian Era." And here oges a few suggestions for content: How #45 got to the presidency of the U.S.; nepotism (Ivanka, her brothers, her husband, Kushner); NRA (the Untouchable); Supreme Court ( the landing of Gorsuch there, sexual harassment strong allegations and Mr. Thomas occupying still a seat), etc., etc.
4
Mitch McConnell is sadly, vastly wiser, move clever, more devious, more adept than certainly Harry Reed, and apparently Schumer.
When the Dems failed to break to 60 vote stupidity in the Senate, to really propel Obama's legacy, they failed then the test of courage. Fools.
McConnell always play to win. The Dem's just want to play nice. And we all suffer
3
Mitch McConnell belongs in the 19th century and should fold up his tent and curl up in a rocking chair. He does not belong in the 21st century—probably not the 20th either. Go back to your old Kentucky home. Just go!
4
This is an example of The NY Times acting as a knee jerk liberal and not adjusting to the current times. Public employees unions have abused their power in many ways and most folks including many democrats dislike them and want them to be curtailed. If the court rules against them there will not be many tears.
1
Hope Dems take back the senate and then Hold all SC nominations by Trump hostage till a Dem is in the white house. What goes around comes around.
2
McConnel could have just dragged his heels, drawn out the process, whipped the votes, and got the same result. Instead, he decided to destroy the process of naming justices. He created a new power for the senate: the pocket veto of supreme court justices. From now on, the new rule is presidents get to name justices for open seats on the supreme court if, and only if, their party controls the senate. And the Democrats just sat there like idiots and let it happen because they thought Hillary was going to win.
1
Mitch McConnell's "proudest moment" was completely improper, and should be undone by the next Democratic president, who should simply kick Neil Gorsuch off the SCOTUS. McConnell only was able to do what he did because Barack Obama was a milksop. I can just imagine if McConnell had tried that against someone with stones, say LBJ.
2
...but her emails!
1
You lost. Get over it. The nation will move on.
2
Not at all what it's about, but you'll never admit that.
1
Ironic in many ways that Gorsuch holds an effectively illegal spot on the bench. Justice Asterisk now and forever.
3
To even this out let's take another look at Clarence Thomas,the do nothing,woman abusing,tax dodger with a wife who has a political fund raising pac which is in clear conflict of interest.We need to revisit how this bum got onto the Supreme court….by lying.There were a number of women who claimed sexual abuses by Thomas who were never heard…let's hear them now.
3
Justice Gorsuch's mother was EPA head from 1981 - 1983, and she attempted to dismantle it, just like Pruitt. She also chain-smoked Marlboros, wore real fur coats and cozied up to the polluters - a real class act. Not surprisingly, she died of cancer at 62. She resigned after being held in contempt of Congress. It's hard to believe she birthed such a pious puritannical son named Neil. You can't make this stuff up. McConnell is a traitor, and history will remember him as such.
5
This was a very low blow to democracy, appointing ultra-conservative Gorsuch to a stolen seat from Garland, a moderate, on flimsy excuses by a Machiavellian swine, Mitch McConnell. This maneuver ran counter to all we consider decent, and the right thing to do. The country shall pay the price for this injustice for years to come. Shameful.
2
It's hard to believe (well, maybe not that hard) that you libs and NYT Ed Board are still whining about Merrick Garland. You did it to yourselves, and had the shoe been on the other foot all we'd have heard is crickets. This quote from a Townhall.com article last year pretty much sums it up: "There’s this hubbub about this being a stolen seat, but Senate Republicans used precedent with Garland’s nomination. In 1992, then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) said that no Supreme Court nominations should be considered during an election year. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer went so far as to say that he would block any further Bush Supreme Court nominations should another vacancy occur in 2007. Liberals say this rule doesn’t exist. It does. Sorry—Joe Biden was a senator and he did lay the groundwork. Like with Harry Reid nuking the filibuster rules on non-Supreme Court nominations, the Democrats own myopia has bit them in the backside."
1
Meanwhile, the earth is melting and kids are getting shot in their schools. But you do you Mitch. Make your old cronies proud.
3
Code, dog whistles... And we accuse Trump of being a conspiracy theorist. What about this editorialist? Enough. Let's elevate the debate, folk.
I have an 8 x 10 custom vinyl banner on my barn which is just off a highly traveled back road in Trump country. It's a photograph of an apocalyptic scene of fiery ruins and a man in a gas mask. In large print it reads: But Lord at least we got Neil Gorsuch! What rich irony that the man my Christian, one issue voting neighbors stole for the SCOTUS seat to "protect life" is just another smarmy boot licking corporatist poised to make life miserable for the next generation of "unborn."
1
One of the benefits of getting old is death and not having to live in this pathetic country any longer.
3
Forty million registered voters stayed home in 2016. Democracy cannot survive with this level of public apathy. Republican fascism depends on it. Get out the vote.
4
Some people should stay home, what with 50% of the population below average in intelligence.
"...Any burden the fees impose on employees’ First Amendment rights is justified by the need to eliminate free riders — workers who enjoy union benefits without having to pay for them...
This is so backward, don't even know where to begin...
Perhaps with some of your own recent articles on the NYC subway system, where the number of comments trying to justify the ridiculous salaries - based on cost of living or some other distorted sense of self-entitlement - was astounding...
Want to talk about "free riders"...How about the disabled LIRR retirees...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/nyregion/21lirr.html
"...Virtually every career employee — as many as 97 percent in one recent year — applies for and gets disability payments soon after retirement...
How about "rubber room" at full pay...
*ttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/18/nyregion/absent-teacher-reserve-plan.html
"...For a dozen years, hundreds of New York City teachers have been paid despite not having permanent jobs, sidelined in most cases because of disciplinary problems or bad teaching records...
It is late, but better late than never , for the New York Times , to point out the perfidy of Mitch McConnell.. Notably silent was Maureen Dowd,, who instead would write repetitive scathing op-eds about President Obama and Secretary Clinton .
History will judge NYT and especially Maureen Dowd as enablers of Mitch . I don't think history will have kind words
3
Another absurd, slanted article in the NYT. Hilary LOST by a majority of electoral votes.
She lost .
Say it again. Lost fair and square.
The fact that a lot of coastal liberals voted for her is not relevant under the current rules.
Public unions should have 2 funds. One for actual union related lobbying, and one for political lobbying.
Why should i be forced to have my mandatory dues be used for lobbying for someone I don't support.
If unions are worthwhile then workers will donate to them. The unions know they are scammers and that is why they want mandatory payments
2
Every year, as part of the annual membership process, NEA members are given the opportunity to check a box indicating that they will contribute a portion of their dues to NEA/PAC, the committee which decides which candidates to support. Nobody is forced to do anything, including joining in the first place.
Just building the Gorsuch/McConnell Court...
1
Obama should have sent Garland up to the court daring justice balls and strikes to refuse to seat him.
1
No one should abide by any rule that comes out of this illegitimate court. The unions should just disregard any ruling with Gorsuch involved. Americans need to take a stand now or we will have no respect for any of our institutions. Russia installed this idiot to our Supreme Court. We don’t have to do it’s bidding. Vive le Resistance!
1
So, Mitch McConnell tried to politicize the court by preventing Obama from nominating a candidate. That will impact us for years - maybe decades - to come. It's instructive to study what happened to the courts in Germany in the 1930's, when they were transformed essentially into Nazi lynching parties. This happened because Hitler was unhappy about the large number of not-guilty verdicts that were being issued. Not enough of his political opponents were being crushed by the legal system.
So McConnell is using the same strategy now - placing judges in the court based on their political values rather than their jurisprudence, and by their dependability in toeing the party line rather than elucidating the true meaning of the Constitution.
When the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee starts using the same tactics employed by what was arguably the most hated regime in human history, it's something to worry about.
Gorsuch is illegitimate, just like the guy who put him there.
3
GOP turns everything it touches into trash. A fool for a president. A congress of NRA dunces . And at least one un-just judge on the so-called Supreme Court.
1
Filth like the criminal GorsucK and liar Alito simply manufacture sophistic legal arguments to support their right-wing ideology.
I learned about these kinds of "justices" fifty years ago at Yale Law, which, I'm sorry to say, liar Alito is also an alumnus.
so interesting, if disgusting, to see Gorsuch rubber-stamping Thomas as Thomas did Scalia. Please, God, may we have a next Justice who has a brain instead of a party affiliation?
1
Time for a nation wide strike by public emploees? Or maybe just a " sick out".
Mitch McConnell showed his true colors when he block consideration of any candidate that Barrack Obama would put forward.
McConnell’s past actions have shown him to be a closet racist.
1
Let it always be remembered that Justice Gorsuch holds not the Antonin Scalia seat, but the Merrick Garland one.
Democrats in blue states should be thanking their lucky stars for justice Neil Gorsuch. If the Supreme Court rules as anticipated - that workers cannot be forced into public unions - blue states will be saved from going broke on account of the lush pipeline of taxpayer money to those public unions (to pay for their lavish benefits). The Times seems to care more for unions than for tax payers.
If the shoe had been on the other foot, can we imagine the GOP accepting that decision? Why didn't the Dems erupt, advertise, kick and scream?
He stole our seat!
of course, Hillary would already have been impeached while Trump shoots people on Fifth Avenue with complete impunity
And people wonder where the cynicism comes from?
What did Mr. McConnell know and when did he know it? His cynical ploy reeks of foreknowledge of the Russian assist.
2
With the Garland non-vote, McConnell did exactly what both Biden and Schumer said they would do if the situation was reversed. It is time for the self righteous democrats to put this hypocrisy to rest.
I agree with FDR in opposing government unions. Government unions are nothing more that a Democrat money laundering scheme.
Gorsich will vote with Thomas. No different than the four liberal drones on the court who always vote together. Again, hypocrisy.
And I wish Sotomayer would base her comments on the law and not politics.
1
Because you had to have Hillary.
Don't complain about the what would be best for America now. That ship has sailed.
Where was the concern for America when a candidate who divided her time between Hollywood and the Hamptons was crammed down our throats? You had an entire country to choose from, and you chose her. This is on you.
1
Too bad, so sad. Notwithstanding a Very poorly run campaign by the Amphibian Who Would Be President, try looking into the Hegalian Dialectic for a change. It really does make such events all too foreseeable...
Mitch and his tribe put Gorsuch on the bench simply because they could. There were more of them. Gorsuch should be impeached when the other tribe has enough people in the house to do it, and the only reason they will need is "because we can". This is called majority rule. The constitution only works if everyone respects it.
Hey, c'mon, it's only judicial activism if MY ox is getting gored!
Why didn't Obama and the Democrats raise their voices as effectively as McConnell and his henchmen.
We keep looking at the Republicans who are usurping our culture and country.
Why are we not holding the Democrats responsible for this travesty?
I believe that Merrick Garland should have been on the Supreme Court bench and Neil Gorsuch should not be on the Supreme Court.
1
I believe McConnell’s move not to acknowledge Merrick Garland means that the president only serves three years now not four. That is very good news indeed with this current group of losers in the White House.
When the Dems get back in power, why not just appoint Garland and take the position that Gorsuch's seat is a stolen seat and his vote shouldn't honored - that there was no justification for failing to give Garland a hearing. In other words, that Grosuch's votes are the fruit of the poisonous tree that McConnell crated.
Trump would likely not have been elected without the support of union members, notably those in construction and manufacturing. For these voters, Trump’s promises of increased focus on jobs, manufacturing, and “unfair” trade agreements, outweighed any concern future SC decisions might have on labor. The DP has an opportunity to educate these voters on the impact of SC decisions on unions and their memberships.
There are three reasons America will be saddled with DT's presidency - perhaps until 2025 - and Gorsuch's antediluvian legal monstrosities for the next 4 decades: abortion, abortion and abortion.
The religious right have worked themselves into a fever over this issue. It supersedes virtually every other topic, and for millions of Americans it was the only issue in the election: Hilary would have appointed a "baby-killer" to the court, and even though DT has numerous flaws, he would not. McConnell is thus deemed a hero to this demographic.
Their moronic logic extends to a candidate with credible charges of child molestation being the preferred choice for a Senate seat. If you're anti-abortion, you can just about get away with murder.
Until and unless America's evangelicals gain some measure of balance over the issue of abortion, we can only expect worse charlatans than DT to be elected to office, and the ensuing degradation of our legal framework will continue.
1
is there no way to impeach gorsuch? for that matter, WHY are supreme court appointments for life? it’s long past time to put term limits on judicial appointees.
If Gorsuch actually believe in the spirit of the Constitution, he should have decllned his appointment to the court, since the entire matter was illegitimate from the start.
1
The NYT got it right. The bigger issue here is the danger of the cynical mind of Mitch McConnell who has the potential to further the damage the nation. He is a demagogue, plain and simple and unfortunately his actions will outlive his tenure in office.
1
If criminality is proven, I want every trace of this administration forfeited as profits of crime: Executive Orders, all hires, and 50-vote partisan jurists. Has anyone else notice the GOP-enabled corporate coup currently in progress? Health and safety measures reversed (intersection of spite, ideology, and selfishness), corporate-owned cabinet, rescision of financial and internet protections, agency mission statements altered, fired and fleeing experts, secrecy and few to no public interactions, dismantle Monuments decades in establishing, divest public assets for private profit. Never before have I been so frightened for my country. @thefairelection
2
Let's hope this turns into a "Me Too" movement among American workers. I hope Trumps fans in the police Unions are watching their future die.
Opposing any ideas from the Dems, doing not a darn thing for the people of West Virginia, failing his duty by never providing a check or a balance to Trump's abuse of power and failing to seat a supreme court justice nominee selected by Obama.
McConnell has such an ego that he believes he will go down in history as a Senate statesman.
History will say different. He was a clown and unfit for political office.
1
The Case of the Illegitimate Justice, by Erle Stanley Gardner. Starring Mitch McConnell as Lt. Tragg, Mitch McConnell as Hamilton Burger, and Mitch McConnell as Judge Carter, the impossible happens.
Amazingly, Perry Mason loses a case.
1
President Obama was one of the greatest presidents in American history; however, in the present political climate, brought to you by Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and Donald Trump, we need a charismatic, strong, bulldog to save our Constitution and our country. We need someone who can pull back those weak, ill-advised American citizens from the dark side and set our country up straight again. Intelligence and patience of course matter, but right now we need all that plus a fighter who will stand up to stupidity, bullies and injustice.
mcconnell should be impeached for dereliction of duty and undermining the constitution. mal actors are proof karma is a hoax
1
What was it you fave prez EVAR said, ''Elections mean things''?
Well, here ya go! Don't present the voters with a 30-year criminal conspirator as your only choice for the presidency and this sort of thing might not happen.
Next time around, come to the voters with people they can believe in and an argument that more than a sliver of the electorate can get behind.
So, how's that Russia collusion impeachment deal going?
if you needed any more confirm that the nyt is off the rails...
neil gorsuch is as distinguished as a jurist could be, but even before his confirmation letter is dry, the "editorial board" of the nyt sees fit to tar and feather him in print. despicable doesn't cover it....
thank g-d that neil gorsuch sits, and we're not being treated to incoherency of the type uttered recently kagan and sotomayor on unions https://nypost.com/2018/02/26/the-lefts-pathetic-case-making-public-work...
you do have to live neil gorsuch, and the rational among us couldn't be happier...
The union issue is of the utmost importance to the maintenance of some balance between the power of working people who produce goods and services and the power of those who govern through the allocation of capital, regardless of its benefit for society.
But more important in my mind is highlighting the lockstep voting of the two justices Gorsuch and Thomas.
I have long felt that there were cases to be made for impeaching Scalia, Alito and Thomas because of their unseeingly intercourse with far-right interests appearing before the court.
Scalia is gone...I believe that Alito and Thomas are still vulnerable with the emphasis on Thomas and his frankly disgusting incapacity to recognize the bias that his marriage bed (and tax returns) might introduce into cases which parties include his wife's clients. At the very least one might expect a recusal from a legitimate jurist with integrity; don't hold your breath when it comes to Clarence Thomas.
That Gorsuch votes lockstep with this judicial midget who also shamelessly lied to the Senate during his confirmation hearings, suggest that Thomas and Gorsuch might well be removed by impeachment in the future.
The time to lay the groundwork is now.
1
That's why when democrats are in control again they need to increase the number of justices on the court and pack it with liberals. Move it from 9 to 11 to fix the theft.
1
Our "democracy" suffered another major blow when McConnell succeeded in breaking all the rules and blocking Obama's right to appoint this and other judges, for no reason that anyone actually believes other than he could do it. We will be paying the price for generations.
1
Please repeat after me "Elections have consequences."
1
Thank you. Sometimes we forget.
The GOP has been waiting DOR this moment for years. To eradicate unions, one of the only push-backs the working people have to corporate power. To what end? It’s simple Darwinism, the strong shall dominate the weak, The rich shall dominate the poor. Human dignity, the fair pursuit of happiness, and equality are for suckers. Complain all you want about it, but once entrenched in their wealth/power, they won’t even hear you.
Stealing the SCOTUS seat was a naked power grab to further this domination.
Folks, if we don’t vote these corporate led tyrants out, and fast, “the American Dream” is dead. And I’m not being dramatic, if the average man and woman can’t get educated, or get decent work, in short, get ahead, then the Dream is dead. Thanks McConnell.
I wonder what judge Gorsuch fells about the constitutionality of how he got on the court.
Cynical ploy? It's far more than that. Americans' deep pride in their country's democracy is blinding them to the fact that the system is broken. Laughably gerrymandered voting districts, blatant vote stifling legislation, this unconscionable theft of a Supreme Court seat - Republicans have gamed the system so thoroughly that the founding fathers would be aghast at how future generations have allowed their ideals to be thrust aside. Trump is the ultimate raised middle finger to the democratic experiment of the writers of the Constitution, and Republicans have meekly fallen into line behind him. There is a yawning gap between the pristine idea of America in which citizens take such pride, and the burlesque show reality at play on a daily basis.
1
The day McConnell leaves Congress will be a very good day for America. His dirty dealings and lies are much more insidious than Trump's, --at least Trump's shallow thoughts are an open book (twitter).
1
One hopes that blue collar workers who voted for Trump are pleased with their choice. They don't want to share the cost of getting better working conditions, and this case will further weaken unions. Once unions are destroyed, Trump voters can to go to the big boss and negotiate a raise for themselves. Maybe they can catch the boss as he exits his limo; or tees up on the third green; or arrives at the airport for his flight to Fiji. Good luck, Bozo.
Certainly there is ample room for debate over the case that is now before SCOTUS. In my opinion people are painting unions in a much more positive light than they deserve in many cases, and also making the issue way too political as someone else pointed out. But again, ample room for debate there. But the issue that is really not debatable if you just read a little further is the legality of Neil Gorsuch's nomination. Blows my mind that this is still brought up. You may not like Gorsuch and you may hate McConnell, and there are many reasons to do so, but nowhere written in the appointments clause does it say the Senate must act on a nomination. It says the president makes nominations with the advice and CONSENT of the Senate, and there is no mention of voting or any time requirements. And as we all know from elementary history, we have separation of powers between our branches of government. Example: the president (executive branch) nominates to the Senate (legislative), subject to their approval, a judge to the Supreme Court. Checks and balances. It would probably shock many of you that 10 other times in history a *final year* president has had a nominee denied or a vote postponed, as was the case with Merrick. This entire thread bears the stench of sore losers complaining endlessly.
As a progressive liberal, I’m leery of unions. They may offer some protection for workers, but their corrupt history and support of tenured mediocre teachers does not always reflect this. Regardless, Gorsuch’s election is a sham.
Past decisions by Gorsuch show clearly he will land with the corporations. Remember he held a man should freeze to death in bitter cold because of his agreement with his company to stand beside his disabled vehicle until help arrived.
2
What McConnell did here is a travesty and the mainstream media should take every opportunity to remind Americans that Gorsuch is an illegitimate justice appointed by an abnormal president who is himself of questionable legitimacy.
2
Did he really have a proud moment.....I must have missed it. Actually it was a disgrace and very tragic for our country. Judge Merrick Garland was a brilliant choice and it is our loss that he wasn't appointed. At the rate they are gojng, the republicans days are numbered. Soon it will be goodbye and good riddens.
The last two years have brought home to us devastating weaknesses in our constitution. There was no recourse when a lawless Congress refused to do its duty and confirm a President's eminently qualified nominee to the Supreme Court. There was no recourse when the electoral college put a man who was the runner up by 3 million votes in the White House. There will be no recourse when the Mueller probe exposes how deep and wide the international criminality of Trump and his hangers-on goes, provided his party holds a majority in congress. The second amendment is used as an excuse to allow the proliferation of weapons of war in the hands of childish men and lunatics. All it has taken is a few truly bad men and a minority of ignorant voters to put a long-lived republic on the precipice of chaos. Without a miracle, future historians will be scratching their heads over how quickly the United States went to hell after September 11, 2001.
1
I predict Gorsuch will side with the "left" on important Fourth Amendment cases like Sullivan, and that the Times will fail to give him credit for doing so.
1
There's only one thing left that is "great" about America: it's potential.
Everything else is now horrible. This nation and all of its bold, proud bluster now boils down to being one gigantic, empty and weak hypocrite. And a terrible example for the world.
SCOTUS has zero credibility. Everyone knows their votes BEFORE argument. The natural and accurate perception is that it is all fixed. J. Roberts "promised" he'd call "balls and strikes". What a lie. Perjury!!! And it is goes beyond mere perception. The vote IS fixed. Rigged! By McConnell in the most undemocratic, unpatriotic, sinister, weasely way. And the American people LET him get away with a broad daylight "robbery" on account of the then president's RACE! While it can't be proven absolutely, we all absolutely KNOW that THAT is how and why Mitch and his republican lynch mob got away with a national crime!
So yeah, now we have to live with the consequences of inaction....LETTING these dog whistle, in the closet cowards hijack, desecrate and sully the American democratic process while we WATCHED.
1
The Republicans started all this in 2013. At that time, their worst fears were coming true. A black man had been elected President. He had saved the economy, created a form of national health insurance and hadn't started any new wars. Disaster! Competent governing had reared its ugly head and was destroying sacred Republican Gipper ideology that government is evil.
In order to support their ideology that government for the common good is evil, the Republicans decided to destroy it. And so, after Obama's 2nd term began, with their master plan of making "Obama a one term president" having failed, they decided to continue blocking in earnest all Obama's nominations for federal positions (government positions, federal judges) that required Senate "advise and consent."
Politifact investigated in detail the Republican refusal to consider Obama's nominees from 2008 - 2013 and concluded "By our count, cloture was filed on 36 judicial nominations during the first five years of Obama's presidency, the same total as the previous 40 years combined" -- which translates to **nine times as many of Obama's candidates were being blocked** for no reason other than to impede the government's ability to function.
Democratic Senator Harry Reid decided, after 5 years, he'd had enough and Democrats changed the rules to allow Obama's nominations to be approved by simple majority. Republicans responded by blocking Obama's nominee Gorsuch for the Supreme Court.
1
The successful hail Mary pass in a football game does not even compare to the illegal and unconstitutional abomination Mitch McConnell pulled off.
I do not believe what Sen. McConnell did should be allowed to stand. I'm not sure what legal remedies might be available, but there must be something other than having to suck it up and live with Mr. McConnell's travesty. Obviously, more important electoral battles must be fought and won in the near-term, but I would be very interested in hearing what possible options there are to address McConnell's epic intellectual dishonesty and bad faith. Mr. McConnell essentially showed his middle finger to the Constitution, the President and the American people. That offense should not be allowed to just fade into history.
I used to want the best for people but I give up.
The fools who most benefit from labor unions aren't smart enough to understand the ramifications of their stupid decisions.
I live in a place full of retired auto workers who voted for Trump.
There is no point in bothering. If liberals hadn't fought for them and protected them all of these years they would be living in a cardboard box under an overpass instead of enjoying retirement benefits many professional people would envy. All because they could put a bolt on a screw.
There comes a time when you must let the baby touch the stove. It just refuses to learn any other way...
In sports we sometimes refer to 'asterisk players', those from Bonds to Armstrong whose great careers have been tainted by their use of PED's. Sadly for Justice Gorsuch, he is clearly the asterisk Justice. Going forward, every time he cases a deciding vote or authors an opinion of the court, concurrence, or dissent, it will be remembered that he is there because of the use of PEP - Performance Enhancing Politics.
Actually, he was not even the user, that was McConnell and his entourage, who broke with tradition and the clear intent of the founders to leave a seat vacant for a year on the chance that their party would win the election. (Parties are not mentioned in the Constitution, and were loathed by Washington and many other Founders.) They lacked the courage to vote down Garland, which would have served as an excuse, but at great political cost.
Keep in mind that Traditions are not important just to the Senate, they are the basis for how SCOTUS operates, starting with precedent, a.k.a. 'stare decisis'.
So McConnell overturned many previous decisions of the Senate in a raw political power grab and the result is
**Justice Gorsuch**.
As I was walking on the SCOTUS stair
I met a Justice who wasn't there.
He wasn't there again today.
Oh, how I wish he'd go away.
2
Why can't a field be added to the employee database that indicates whether they paid fees or not? If not, then they don't receive any of the benefits that the union negotiated on their behalf.
1
The Merrick Garland debacle was pure racism to prevent a SCOTUS appointee by an African American. In a country built on slavery that says how little has changed.
1
Wait I thought liberals were all ecstatic when judicial despots made liberal legislation out of thin air according to their biases and because the rest of the citizens were to biased to to see the enlightened left. I hope liberals show the same sycophant worship to court decisions that are based on the law and are limited to reversing completely fake decisions. liberals started it now live with it. MAGA
Can a SC judge be impeached? I thought they were supposed to be immune to such things?
Gorsuch should resign and promote/suggest Garland.
2
A thought experiment for the Times' editorial writers: The Democrats take over the Senate in 2018. In early 2020 one of the four liberals on the Supreme Court dies. The new Senate majority leader vows not to approve Trump's nominee, but to let the voters first have their say in the November election. Would the Times castigate the Democrats for partisan subversion of the nomination process?
I feel as though my first amendment rights are trampled every day by these old white men in congress whose partisan politics disparage the very notion of representative government. Gorsuch has no moral compass; a genuine ethical citizen, would have taken himself from the running, in response to McConnell’s cynical move, which violated all respect for the rule of law. Does McConnell even realize that many of us naturally assume he’s just another simple-minded racist and that history will judge him so?
1
Elizabeth, do you really think he cares?
Don't blame Mitch, blame the Dems and their ramming Hillary down our throats. I like Hillary, but she couldn't beat Trump. And now here we are, our country adrift because 'it was her turn.' Pragmatism lost out in the Democratic primaries to plutocracy, and now the country, not just the unions, are paying a terrible price. It's 2018. Let's not blow it again.
Our country is messed up in so many profound ways. How has the last generation been so careless? Greed is a sickness that will kill us all.
1
Fascism at its core. Democracy? What a joke. It's a plutocracy and nothing else. This is not what the French started a democratic revolution for.
I am still waiting for Jill Stein to ride up and save us all. Big thanks to all the voters who voted for her BTW. Nice job.
Noam Chomsky has a nice piece about wasting votes based on contrived conscience. Worth a read before this November.
I dont think Americans need any more rights.
We do, however, have a crying need for responsibility.
Neil Gorsuch fits the mold.
Is this editorial from the same paper that only a few weeks ago published a revealing investigative article on how public unions are responsible for our excessive subway construction costs?
So disgusted by McConnell contempt for government..
1
Still surprising to me how the Republican Party ....which I thought prided itself in being people who stick to law and religion (?), and yet act so coldly towards other citizens.
I cannot for the life on me imagine a Democrat, in the Oval Office or in the Senate acting like these Republicans do. And their people applaud the fact that they won the Presidency or won a seat in the Supreme court.
Thru what means exactly? Do the care? Nope!
Both seats were "won" in shameful ways.....according to lil' old me.
Sad!!!
“Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly three million votes.”
When a quarterback loses the SuperBowl but points out he threw for more yardage.
Hilarious.
There is a little something called the Constitution that protects minorities from the tyranny of the masses.
1
Imagine what the world would be like if Republicans loved their country...
1
Those who voted for Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, or a write-in choice made this happen...
The 8 million of us thank you.
I sincerely hope that all purist liberals have learned their lesson in future elections: "Not compromising may give you a certain ideological satisfaction but you are not going to get what you want." Barack Obama
Now parked for life in the seat where Judge Garland should be sitting is the ultraconservative Neil Gorsuch, who we’re supposed to believe represents the “voice” of a citizenry that preferred Hillary Clinton by a margin of nearly three million votes.
-------------------------------------
Neil Gorsuch may not represent the voice of California voters (Hillary's popular vote margin primarily comes from California; if you take away CA, she lags Trump by a few million votes) but he sure does represent the 30 of 50 States in the Union that gave Trump the popular vote majority.
Mitch McConnell was simply following the Biden Rule, and if you have a problem with Biden, say so.
Why should a public sector employee who does not support Democrats agree to pay the dues that cannot be distinguished from the political activities that YOU CONCEDE the public sector unions engage in?
Think, Editors.
1
McConnell will go down as the facilitator of the corporate takeover of the US government. Since the turn of the century McConnell has been at the centre of 16 years of unwarranted wars, the culture disputes of moral hypocracy, the misogyny, the guns, the anti worker bullying, the lobbying corruption, Trump, finally now the Supreme's.
Years of propaganda against any collective action in american society other than guns and war have had their effect. Hope your happy your tips are now going to the boss and your bathroom break is 3 minutes. Who you gonna complain to now?! Oh ya, the immigrants or the intellectuals.
For all the union members who voted from Trump, congratulations!
Republicans are utterly corrupt and only exist to gain two things: power and money. The former is the means to more of the latter.
McConnell is a Shakespearean draft, a watery mix of Iago and Richard III, who schoolchildren will boo in school plays generations from now.
2
When the Comrade-In-The-Oval is removed from office, so to, should every action he took while in office. This includes removing the Russian Justice from the Supreme Court.
1
Just as Justice Thomas never should have been seated on the Supreme Court, so with Justice Gorsuch. His name and his votes will forever be seen as illegitimate by many millions of Americans.
When and if Democrats take back both Houses of Congress they should remove Gorsuch from the bench as well as the other illegitimately nominated judges Trump as put in place and keep them empty until a Democrat is back in the White House.
This is a mute point since now since the republicans say it is useless to have any laws at all.
Take the specious argument that you must not pass laws to ban assault weapons or any gun because a criminal can still obtain a gun.
Using that same logic we should remove all laws that ban anything because those laws will be broken. Murders still murder, thieves still steal and presidents still sexually molest.
No laws total anarchy is what republicans want.
Remember the three Rs.
Repeal
and
Replace
ALL
Republicans
Dave
God willing, Trump will be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors (felonies, really) and all of his appointments to the bench need to be nullified and re-done.
I have long thought Senator McConnell is the most despicable person in America. He more than anyone else has brought us gridlock in Congress, he greased the rails for Trump, and behind the scenes he stoked the fires of hate and racism.
2
Yes, Mitch McConnell's refused to consider President's Obama's lame duck nomination of Merrick Garland to SCOTUS.
Which is exactly what Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden said should be done when the tables were turned and the Democrats controlled the Senate. Somehow the Times' EB always forgets to mention this.
1
evidently the American people agreed with Mitch (or you can just keep blaming the Russians)....
1
Since Trump took office Mitch McConnell's Washington D.C. office staff no longer picks up the phone at 202-224-2541. Our country has been hijacked.
Vote and scream in November 2018. We want our money and our country back.
Mr. McConnell should have been impeached for dereliction of duty, and still should be. His act was an outrageous abuse of power and a complete refutation of due process. Shameful and despicable in every way.
Mitch McConnell made the Supreme Court as legitimate as a $3 bill.
Compromised. Corrupt. Stolen. Illegitimate. Kangaroo. - All come to mind.
I guess Mitch thought he could just steal some integrity.
I thought it was Bush v. Gore...I guess I'll have to update my talking points.
1
Given the number of white, unionized workers voted Trump, I, a lawful immigrant of color with an advanced degree from Stanford, could not care less if unionized folks starve.
1
Mitch McCriminal
1
Opinionate on the election, the will of the people, McConnell, Gorsuch, or on the case at hand. But your mixing them together is demagogic.
Alabama born Addison Mitchell McConnell, Jr. spent eight white supremacist Confederate drawling years hissing "nullification" and "secession" trying to make African American President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama a one term President. Denying even a hearing and vote on Merrick Garland's nomination cut nearly a year from the second Obama term.
More importantly the Supreme Court of the United States is exposed as the profoundly partisan political third branch of government that has usually been when interpreting the law. But the deeper problem is the nature of the law itself. Law is not just nor moral nor fair nor objective. Law is gender, color aka race, ethnicity, national origin, theology, socioeconomics, politics and history plus arithmetic. Black African enslavement along with separate and unequal black African Jim Crow were both legal.
1
And the voting rate for many liberal demographics is abysmal, especially in midterms -- so, expect more of the same. We get what we deserve.
The most chilling part of this Editorial is stating that President Trump will be in power until 2025 at the latest! And Trump might have the opportunity to nominate two more Supreme Court justices! Ignorance, Nihilism, and mean spiritedness might just run amok!
Gorsuch has no shame or even any indication whatsoever that his seat was stolen.
I agree completely that the government's requiring government employees to pay any part of the union's tab for political action is compelled speech, which is prohibited.
But prohibition of the free speech of collective bargaining is also prohibited government government activity. Ordering the union to devise a formula for subtracting the percentage of dues that members pay for the union's campaign activity works well for private unions. It should be extended here.
Republicans stole Obama's court appointment, but listen up republicans: what goes round comes round!
2
This sentence right here: "have also become a potent organizing tool in Democratic politics." ruined your whole editorial.
1
The smear against Gorsuch notwithstanding, with respect to the outcome of the case, there is no greater gift the Court could give American kids and families than decimating the teachers’ unions. On behalf of every kid stuck with a lousy teacher that can’t be fired, thank you Mitch.
3
And this is why I keep telling my teacher friends to quit. The truth is even as a kid I knew most kids are lazy and dumb (not unlike their parents) and yet days after multiple teachers died trying to defend other people’s bad kids the join from parents about the notion that teachers might get paid even less is both ungrateful and counter productive. If you think people will want to teach your terrible children without union benefits keep thanking this ungrateful attack on their livelyhood. You think there is a teacher shortage Now? Oh honey you ain’t seen nothing yet.
You think the teacher strike in West Virginia is hurting kids now. Ha! You think there are bad teachers there now? Ha! Wait and see.
After the election of trump I learned one thing. You can reason with people. It’s better to let them have what they want and when the inevitable outcome of their own choices happens let them sleep in the bed they made. So you want to destroy teachers unions because you think they are the problem? Wait and see.
These lifetimes appointments to the judiciary will set us back for generations on civil rights. We have to help get out the vote and get these religious zealots out of office.
1
Unions are people too!
Just a history will recognize Trump as an illegitimate president, due to Russian meddling in our election, history will recognize Gorsuch as an illegitimate justice due to Republicans blocking Obama's appointment of Garland.
1
Oh the hypocrisy!
Democrats would’ve done exactly the same to get their preferred justice.
Another factor: Harry Reid made it all possible by canceling the 60 vote rule.
One more: DNC rigged the primaries to install the incompetent Hillary Clinton who couldn’t beat the wackiest person ever to run for President.
3
Um. No. Why do people say these things that are lies like we weren’t there. The reason Neil isn’t in the court is BECAUSE of the 60 vote majority that was needed. The minute they got a Republican President they changed it to 51. It was the republicans that couldn’t win by the rules so they changed the rule. This happened less than two years ago. How can you lie like we weren’t there?
to M P
Neil IS in the court.
Ridiculous. If Scalia had not died, this would probably already be settled law.
1
Merrick Garland (hardly a lefty revolutionary) should have been seated in a recess appointment, leaving the Justices of the Supreme Court to duke it out over whether he was entitled to remain. So while Mitch McConnell will go down in history as a subverter of the US Constitution and of will of US voters he did, in fact, have an enabler in the White House.
#takestwototango
Unions should negotiate for members who pay their dues and that should be reflected in the final agreement.
Employers (public & private) would save $$$ by not giving a raise to those who were not part of the negociations.
Let the Janus’s of the world pay their own way for pay hikes.
Yes but some states require they negotiate for EVERYONE AND at the same time want people to not have to pay. That’s the how problem.
Live and learn, New York Times.
We get a new Supreme Court justice. We can just make out (through clouds and mist, as it were) a distant landscape. All the important decisions--the groundbreaking decisions he will make. American life shaped for the better. Or for the worse. Rights given. Rights taken away. "The bounds of freedom made wider yet" (as Tennyson put it). Or NOT made wider. Drawn in. Contracted.
All this about labor unions! I was hardly aware of it. All I saw was that one eminent Senator sticking a finger in Mr. Obama's eye. Or--to put it more strongly--giving him the finger. Expressing a sovereign contempt for the duly elected Chief Magistrate of the United States--and having (alas!) the power to make that contempt stick.
And the Lord above knows! my own contempt for Mr. McConnell could hardly run deeper. I recall--we all recall--his unalterable resolve to make Mr. Obama "a one-term President." The business of the nation--the business of the United States!--played second fiddle to this despicable show of partisan politics.
No Senator--I am not one of your admirers. Not this child! No way!
And now, New York Times. . .
. .. you have given me MORE GROUNDS for regarding the honorable gentleman. . . . .
. . .with unalienable, ineradicable contempt.
It grieves me to say thank you.
But thank you.
1
There will likely be a few more regressive conservative appointments coming. If those are of similar age as Gorsuch, the Supreme Court will be leaning against your instincts for the rest of our lifetime. Thank the Founding Fathers who produced the greatest country on earth for setting this up. Stop licking your wounds. This battle is lost.
The outmoded Electoral College appointed Mr Gorsuch.
1
My schools
My banks
My generals
My military
MY JUDGES
When you have to depend on Chief Justice John Roberts to continue to show a little more left lean to bail you out......reality really sets in.
This disdain for the constitution and the rule of law began with Joe Wilson screaming "you lie" during Barack Obama's joint session of congress speech. He should have been removed from the event on the spot so the nation would have seen that the President meant business. McConnell's claim the "American" people should have a say in the next Supreme Court appointee after the election which was nine months away should have been immediately been challenged in the courts as a constitutional violation. The American people had already decided with the election of a thoughtful, intelligent and articulate president who had a deep understanding of constitutional law.
McConnell and Ryan as well are empty suits in pursuit of an agenda the majority of the American people don't agree with. This is demonstrated with either their silence or complicity with chaotic events damaging to the democratic process and the rule of law. Trump is too stupid to understand how government works and has no motivation to learn about it as his "brand" is attacking anyone that is critical of him or disagrees with his frenetic policy positions.
I believe Mitch McConnell should be charged with dereliction of duty and an abuse of his office and should be deposed by the DOJ or a congressional committee to explain in what way he can justify his action, or absence thereof. Lock him up !!!
2
Does the Editorial Board really believe that Trump will be in office until 2025?.
My question is why in the world would trump leave the presidency at all. He has shown that rules don’t apply to him. Laws don’t apply to him. Why then should term limits?
If Trump is a FRAUD then Gorsuch is as well, as I said when George W. was in the midst of his Presidency " There's going to be a huge mess to clean up". Well here we are again & I suspect it's going to be even "HUGER".
Let's not forget that McConnel's shameless power grab was aided by a foreign government who has no interest in our stability or the health and welfare of our people
1
Only 10.7 percent of American workers were union members in 2017; a clear minority of the total workforce in the United States. This figure clearly demonstrates that a large majority of workers find no need or value in union membership. So why is it that the Democrats have such a hard time understanding this? Do they really think that if Merrick Garland had taken a seat on the Supreme Court that people would be clamoring to sign union cards? It's no secret that unions staunchly support Democratic candidates with funds collected from it's members. In 2016 labor unions contributed $110 million to political campaigns; most of it to Democrats. What exactly did that buy their membership? How would that have benefitted their membership had they taken that money and reinvested that into them instead of frittering it away on politics? Perhaps more people would agree to union membership if they actually saw a benefit coming from it, but they don't. So that's what's really behind the Democrats crying foul; they're going to lose money. It's got little or nothing to do with benefitting the common man.
3
Is is that workers find no need for unions or that corporate interests have won out over unions, making union representation much less available?
Part of this is certainly that fewer workers desire union representation. As so called knowledge workers make up a higher percentage of the workforce, it makes sense that they are better off negotiating the best deal for themselves. A highly skilled software engineer, for example, is in a strong bargaining position.
It's also true that there are vast numbers of lower skilled, commodity workers who have no individual bargaining positions. Without collective bargaining, they are easy to take advantage of.
One of the great ironies in this whole discussion is that union busting has lead to lower wages in some really hard jobs (chicken processing plants, for example), which has lead to those jobs being backfilled by undocumented immigrants. Had unions been able to help Americans get a living wage for those jobs, there would be fewer illegal workers.
Organization against industrial capital, I understand. "Public sector" unions organized against exploitation by tax payers? At the very least, joining public unions must be entirely voluntary. At best, given the existence of mature labor laws to protect worker rights, public unions must be declared anachronistic from another era and banned. I guarantee you that millions of software workers (who work long hours without overtime) do not consider themselves more exploited than union protected teachers.
2
As some who cherishes the first amendment protections and also supports unions, I am torn. But I fall on the side that it is clearly unconstitutional to force someone who works for the government to pay directly or indirectly for political issues they do not agree with.
4
Fair-share fees have nothing to do with political lobbying. They are for collective bargaining. I don’t get to choose how my taxes are spent. And not mentioned in the press, unlike paying taxes, Janus can choose to leave his job and take another one. This is just hatred of unions, not an infringement of rights.
We didn't realize in 2016 that the unconstitutional action taken by McConnell, at Trump's request, was the beginning of a deluge of daring end-runs around the Constitution. Others have been successfully overturned or constrained within legal levels in court.
Still, the Garland nomination was never contested, and it should have been. The Constitution requires the Senate to perform its advice and consent function. It can vote down the nomination, but it cannot refuse to perform its assigned task.
Pure election year politics made Democrats so timid that they turned their backs on a constitutional mandate, and failed to recognize that McConnell too was equally fearful of a vote's potential effect on the election. The moral is that congressional fear of losing one's seat can completely undo the rule of law.
1
We diidn't? I did.
1
The usual Spineless Democrats leaded by Obama wasted the Constitutional mandate the People placed under their care after the initial election of Obama, and that way lost the trust of millions of supporters like my wife and I.
Since the election of Barack Obama there has not been one thing put forth by Mitch McConnell and the GOP that I agree with. Not one. I don't think there has been a time in our history where so many horrible people have held power.
12
Government in America has reduced itself to such a cavalcade of corruption and bad faith under a loitering and ever more desperately false conservatism, entrenched vastly beyond its time or popularity, that we are now actually depriving labor of self-government, while exalting corporations not merely as persons, but as prohibitively irreproachable oracles, tithe-takers, and overlords. We'd rather not call this, fascism. It's so unoriginal to concede the truth.
5
Thank you for calling out Mitch McConnell and his cynical move to keep Merrick Garland off the Supreme Court. At least two justices should not be there: Gorsuch and Thomas.
6
Also Roberts and Alito, as they were appointed by the illegitimate president G.W. Bush, who took office in a right-wing coup engineered by ... the Supreme Court!
2
We had become complacent, lulled by seven years of sanity under Obama. We should have been marching in the streets by the millions the minute McConnell violated the constitution. What a tribute to Scalia, the constitutionalist. The Republicans will stop at nothing to consolidate and hold power and money -- union busting, embracing another guided era of inequality. The latest NRA complicity playing out over the bodies of dead children is their most shameful moment of all. But I'm sure we haven't hit bottom yet.
8
The opinion fails to mention that the Koch brothers are funding this challenge.
10
In my 49 years on earth, nothing politically has enraged me more than this stunt by Mcconnell. I have given up on the United States after this.
10
McConnell's decision is right up there with the elimination of term limits for China's President Xi Jinping. Both solidified plutocracy and strangled democracy. The future is locked in without a revolution.
8
When a republican is running for office those who enjoy benefits without paying their fair share are 'takers' to be demeaned.
When a republican sits on the supreme court those who enjoy benefits without paying their fair share are poor victims of oppression.
5
Since Trump filed immediately for the 2020 election, that means none of his nominations should be considered according to McConnell logic.
8
If for no other reason, this is why the Bernie left should have supported Hillary in the general election. But spiting her was obviously more important than having everything they care about stomped on for the next 40 years. Hope they enjoy it.
6
We all lament the loss of good paying jobs and that wages have stagnated for more than 30 years. The demise of unions has been a major factor. Yes, at times unions overstepped but in the big picture they provided workers with a voice and a counterbalance to the power that the employer wields.
It's been the goal of the Koch brothers and like minded Republicans to stamp out unions once and for all. If they succeed, you can be assured that wages will continue to stagnate and that employer paid benefits will continue to shrink or go away.
It's past time to elect politicians who will support workers the right to unionize and who will appoint judges who will protect those rights.
8
We are also now living in terror when/if Trump gets another judge on the court. One culprit is Ginsburg, who refused to step down when Obama could have easily replaced her. Her ego has now placed the nation in peril.
1
Our corporate overlords have done a great job convincing people that unions aren't needed anymore. The masses are easily manipulated to vote against their best interests. As Pogo said decades ago, we have met the enemy and it is us.
3
Gorsuch will likely still be in office when the "jury" (of history) will have ruled on the McConnell legacy. And the result, obviously, will not be kind to McConnell. Shameful, cynical, diabolical, and unabashedly self-serving-- those will be the kindest words to describe McConnell. Not that his miserable legacy will bother him any more than his conscience did while he earned his wretched place in history.
So, he might be laughing from the grave, but all is not lost. If we can survive Trump, and Gorsuch, there will come a day when American students are taught the truth about this era, and the hate-filled, selfish, un-American debacle that it was.
7
The Democrats need to learn, in light of GOP's scorched-earth policy (to wit: sitting on the Garland nomination) to stop taking the 'high moral ground', but to scorch some earth themselves if in control.. But it's more likely the GOP will first suspend elections - or declare any Democrats victories invalid (i.e. full dictatorship); in other words, sometime this year.
3
If Mr Mueller succeeds in finding Mr Trump guilty of Obstruction of Justice and having colluded with the Russians we will be in a very serious constitutional crisis and the last election and all that followed should be considered illegitimate. We should move to have new elections as soon as possible and Neil Gorsuch should no longer be allowed to serve on the court. The election of President Trump and the disgusting behaviour of Mitch McConnell are a very clear indication that our system does not work. In the UK with the Parliamentary system a vote of no confidence can be taken and the corrupt players can be thrown out. The American system can only work when all parties abide by the rules.
5
McConnell blatantly violated his oath to uphold the Constitution by completely ignoring the President's nominee. This should be clear to everybody, from the most liberal Democrat to the strictest Republican originalist. The intent of the founders was very clear. I believe Obama should have taken this issue to the Supreme Court. Now we will see the "McConnell doctrine" in action every time the President and the Senate are in different parties. If the Democrats take the Senate, it's likely Trump will not get a vote on any SCOTUS nominee for his final two years. And then we'll hear the Republicans screaming about the injustice! They'll have themselves to blame by letting McConnell get away with this violation of the Constitution.
5
As a DC resident, taxed without representation, nothing infuriates me more than McConnell & co's assault on our democracy. The one national office I get to vote for, the one place where I feel I have any say at all was trodden by this dishonest manipulator, at great long term cost to our nation.
It also speaks to how important it is for voters everywhere to call for DC to have representation in Congress. We have more Americans living here as Wyoming, yet no senators or congressional reps. If we did, there would not have been a Republican majority to pull off this despicable act. Almost 700,000 citizens here without representation!
5
No one person has done more damage to the country and especially our democracy than Mitch McConnell. He should have been expelled from the Senate for the harm he caused to the institution, and vilified for the harm he has done to the country. His legacy will long outlive him, and the damage will go on for years.
5
Elections have consequences. McConnel had every legal right to hold the open seat for the SCOTUS, allowing the winning candidate in 2016 to name the justice to be approved by the Senate. Your article is based on the premise that Mitch knew Trump was going to win and the GOP would hold the Senate when they were defending 23 seats. Just let it go b/c the editorial does nothing but fan the flames that HRC blew it.
2
The Republicans were willing to deny a President Hillary Clinton any SCOTUS appointments for at least 4 years. Would that have been the Senate's legal right as well?
1
We're heard the FOX News and Republican take it being "legal" - but you see the rest of can actually read. And the words of the Constitution in respect to McConnell's obligation are pretty clear. Refusing to fulfill his obligations. Writing words into the Constitution are not the basis of legal. Power grab, yes.
1
Bipartisanship had been on life support for many years, but this transparently cynical ploy by McConnell finally killed and buried it. Thinking Americans of all parties should not stand mute when our Constitution is shamelessly hijacked for political purposes. This is a very big deal. The fact that McConnell and his cronies were able to pull this off without a national outcry is a sad commentary on our current state of affairs.
6
Yes Republicans outmaneuvered Obama with this outrageous stalling tactic
But all is fair in love, war and politics.
Perhaps the bad, very bad and horrendously bad decisions of this Court over the next decades will ultimately help teach us a very painful lesson.
Yes voting really does matter.
3
McConnell and Trump are two peas in a pod. They are both willing to burn down the house to win their battles. They seem to have no concerns about their prominent roles in the weakening of the democratic institutions that have nurtured our nation for nearly 250 years. They stagger through life with no ethical boundaries, no moral compass. Sad for them; sad for us.
4
Free speech? I don't care if they invoke Free Willy to get the job done. I got a look at a discarded pension check stub the other day from a gentleman who'd worked in the state system in some capacity or other for his career. The total that had actually been put into the account was $133,000. The payouts had already exceeded one million dollars and were still going. Who picked up the other $867,000? That'd be the Illinois taxpayer. And that's just one state retiree.
The Times insists on pitching this as some class struggle that pits the "every man" (ostensibly on AFSCME's side) against some sinister group of "corporate interests".
There's another group of "every men" and working stiffs in Illinois who are very interested in seeing AFSCME clipped and Right-to-Work become law. The Illinois taxpayers. Normal everyday joes like me who hang out with plumbers, cops and state workers and drive pickup trucks.
AFSCME has been on both sides of the bargaining table for over four decades now, and the supposed guardians of the public interest they've been, um, 'negotiating" with (the elected officials) have been agreeing to contractual concessions that have obviously been mathematically impossible but made oh so much easier by the campaign contributions that they've pocketed prior to entering the room.
So enough, please, about this class struggle. The folks on the other side of the issue from AFSCME aren't Daddy Warbucks. They're regular (taxpaying) guys like me.
2
Democrats need to take a hard look at the rules of the game. While they were basking in The first black president and potentially first female president, they took their eye off the ball.
We need certain teams just reading the fine print of the rules. We need to get an agenda and stay laser focused on it.
DACA - promise the Dreamers a path to citizenship and give part of the wall. Say you’ll do over and over.
Save Medicare, Medicaid and SS. Focus on that, not repeal of the tax cut. Focus on concerns of youth and bringing actual jobs like rebuilding our entire country to compete in 2020.
Stay away from Trump and express the danger presented by Russia. We need to get to the bottom of it and protect our democracy even if our President won’t. If there’s collusion, there’s collusion but don’t get into a ninny tweet war with this guy.
3
The Republicans' blatant refusal to even consider Obama's nominee — when the constitution requires the Senate to "provide advice and consent" — remains among the most horrendous miscarriages of justice in our country's history. And as bad as McConnell is, Gorsuch is just as responsible. As someone who should have known better, based on his background in the law, Gorsuch was wrong to accept this stolen nomination, and his service on the Supreme Court will always be seen as illegitimate by anyone who values the founders' intentions. I hope this is something that keeps him up at night, but somehow, given that he's a member of the same craven, disgraceful party as McConnell, I doubt it.
2
Forget about McConnell. If Gorsuch is a man of honor he must leave when Trump is removed.
2
You refer to McConnell's action in refusing Obama's nominee as a "cynical ploy". But wasn't it more of an illegal act than anything else?
3
If SCOTUS rules in favor of Janus, lawsuits should immediately follow against the United States with regards to income taxes being compelled payment in violation of free speech because the tax money is being used for purposes with which we disagree. This is a dangerous razor's edge that SCOTUS finds itself on and the Koch-backed activist judges on the right side of the bench are too blinded by their flying drool to see it.
4
With each new revelation from the Mueller probe it seems increasingly clear that Donald Trump is an illegitimate president, and as such, Neil Gorsuch is an illegitimate justice. These are not democratically elected leaders - they have been installed by a foreign power, and enabled by a corrupt Congress. We must push back in accordance with this uncomfortable truth.
3
If President Obama, on hearing McConnell's treasonous and tortured reasoning on this issue, had just reasoned that the United States Senate does not control the country's calendar and given McConnell 90 days to act, he could have made the Garland an interim appointment.
1
Obama could have stood tall, instead he was a coward by not asserting that - since the Senate had abdicated its responsibility - Merrick Garland would become the next SC justice. The outcome could have been no worse than it is now. Do you think a right-wing autocratic Republican president would have hesitated to do it?
I will be very disappointed if the Democrats take the Senate, a SC seat opens, and they do not say, "We will not allow a President who was elected with the help of a hostile foreign power to seat a Supreme Court Justice." There is more justification for a stance of this sort than Mitch McConnell's partisan, unpatriotic reason.
2
Mitch McConnell violated his oath of office. There is no other way to understand his action. He should have been removed.
4
We shouldn't even allow public-employee unions.
2
Mitch McConnell personifies everything that is wrong in Congress, along with Ryan and the rest of Trump's GOP enablers. The only way to restore balance to our political system and SCOTUS is to vote the Trumpists -- I won't even call them Republicans -- so permanently out of office they will never return. Vote people or you deserve what you get.
2
"The government is allowed to compel subsidies of others’ speech all the time without violating the Constitution, they point out, such as by collecting and spending taxes."
This is not exactly a compelling argument for our chosen rulers. It seems clear to me that the very concept of taxation is next on the chopping block ("theft," "worse than slavery"). In their minds, there is no such thing as a commonwealth, and the idea of paying any taxes at all, or doing anything for the common good, is an appalling affront to their "freedom."
Something for nothing. People who want the benefits of union's negotiations but do not pay union dues. The free loader mentality.
Does anyone really think that once the unions are killed the management will listen to the workers?
Do they think management will listen to a lone voice.
Read your history people. The coal miners unionizing would be an eye-opener.
Elite publications did nothing to stop the attacks on our clearly very vulnerable democratic institutions. Trump created a saturation in the news and continues to control the narrative with the deft dexterity.
If the houses were Democratically controlled, there would be some balance in our democratic system of government. instead we have a semblance of a dictatorship with all three arms of government controlled by the wild ideologies of one man.
Since the Russians aided Trump, it can be extrapolated that they helped Republican Congressional elections too.
Yes, McConnell should be ashamed. But, the media ought to be ashamed too.
I commend the exceptional work of the NYT.
But often, the news media is still tricked and manipulated by Trump.
We the People have been robbed of a legitimate Supreme Court. What is the remedy for this travesty?
1
Merrick Garland got ripped off.
But more so, with the treatment of Merrick Garland, which was designed and promoted by the Republicans, the American people got ripped off.
Surely Trump was probably angry yesterday when the Court wouldn’t do him any DACA favors. But surely Trump and the Repiblicans can depend on other favors from Gorsuch.
So soon there will be no unions.
Those underemployed and unemployed angry "working class" white men from Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan who voted overwhelmingly for trump are getting exactly what they apparently wanted. A minuscule tax cut, guns guns and more guns and the slow destruction of Obamacare. Good for them I guess. Bad for the rest of us.
1
Perhaps with a democratic majority in the Congress and Presidency, we can bring Clarence Thomas´issues to light in having lied about prior sexual harassment. That would open up a spot and bring justice to another slice of history that got glossed over.
When a country races toward a situation in which increasing numbers of people have minuscule or no jobs and poor access to education, it ends up with something resembling the French Revolution. Billionaire Nick Hanauer has pointrd this out to his fellow billionaires,basically saying that people with pitchforks will be coming after them if they don't wake up and clean up their act. They, and their purchased wealthy Congress members, including perfidious Mitch McConnell, are not listening. Hungry mobs are dangerous and indiscriminate. I guess the 1% think they'll be safe in their gated communities.
Our current downward progression began with people buying into Ronald Reagan's trickle down economics, his attack on unions, and his coded language against welfare users which really was an appeal to our secret, and inaccurate, racist idea that only persons of color use welfare. We may be about to reap the ultimate consequence of our own folly in not paying better attention.
1
Union workers themselves have helped their demise by voting republican. A lot of the guys do not like being aligned with the party of diversity, women and gays. They feel more kinship with the boys club. But there is a price for that, and their younger union brothers will be paying it.
The "stolen seat" rhetoric is nonsense. There can be no doubt that a President Clinton, aided by the Democrats in the Senate,would have pushed Garland aside for a nominee more to her liking.
1
What a nonsensical, mash-up of an opinion piece by the Editorial Board regarding the Supreme Court and the Janus v. AFSCME case.
1. Senator McConnell and the Republicans played a long game on a political appointment, that of Garland to the Supreme Court, and beat President Obama and the Democrats. Kudos to them.
2. The Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision affirming slaves had no rights was decided 7-2 in 1857. It took a Civil War, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment to eventually overturn it. So, the relevance of Supreme Court precedent is specious, at best, especially one from four decades ago. There is every reason for the Court to re-examine this precedent.
3. Holding up public sector unions as the last bastion of union activism or, more perversely, as the vanguard of a re-born labor movement is a joke. Elected leaders are the managers of the public purse. Yet, elected managers bargaining with unions that have donated millions of dollars to elections and in other ways to sway public policy, then those are not fair to the taxpayers. In fact, under any other circumstances, this would be considered collusion and graft - and a criminal offense. But, since the elected officials making the rules are the beneficiaries, it is all perfectly acceptable.
Public sector unions are a primary cause behind the bloat and inefficiency in government. The sooner they are curtailed or totally removed from having any role in government, the better off we'll all be.
2
The unions for government workers are bankrupting the country with significant benefits packages which states and citizens cannot afford. So who is going to pay for these outlandish benefits???
2
Unions, for all intent and purposes, are dead. Not as a result of this push to end mandated dues. They are dead because workers in America resented paying more in prices and taxes for services and products. And some union members resented paying dues and getting "nothing" in return. Well look at what the demise of unions has bought to America's dinner table: lower wages, bearing a much higher share of health care and retirement, having to work longer hours and much later in life. And they proudly wear not the union label, but the one that says American workers are to blame for the demise of their own standard of living. And they bought the argument while executives and shareholders got all the money. And they continue to blame their fellow workers. Well sit back and enjoy the ride.....downward. Your lives aren't going to get better. They are going to get worse. Because you agree now that you don't deserve any of the increased profit. You don't have to worry about your children being better off than you. Because you handed them a lower living standard on a cardboard platter. And Corporate America is laughing at you all the way to the bank. Making America Great Again. Just not for you.
3
And of course we continue to claim that we have a Democracy with checks and balances, and that the whole World should learn from us and copy us. There is no doubt that the Jeffersonian Democracy has failed miserably. Not because there is anything wrong with the its structure, well not too much wrong, but because the poor Founding Fathers never envisioned that instead of honorable and respectable patriots who would put the Country above anything else including their lives, a bunch of charlatans who would sell their mother to get reelected will roam the Halls of Congress. If they did, they would have written the Constitution such that a con artist of highest caliber such as McConnell would not have been able to blatantly trample upon the Constitution to preserve the intersst of the Party while cheered on by the other Republicans who wore the Constitution on their sleeves. No Ladies and Gentlemen, we do not have a Democracy nor do we have Checkd and Balances. The only checks that we have is the ones that the Rich and the Corporations write for the Candidates that best protect THEIR INTERESTS thanks to Right Wing zealots such as Scalia, Thomas Gorsuch and Alito. So lets do the World a favor and stop preaching Jeffersonian Democracy to the rest of the World!
The further break of our checks and balances. Gorsuch wears his partisanship on his sleeve, and rather than using any critical judicial and legal and historical thinking, he uses his political thinking.
Needless to say, this type of thinking is less deep, less scholar, less reflective, less difficult intellectually. It is more tribal, more knee jerk. It is not what the Supreme Court was designed for. We have been placing less rigorous minds on the court, and that can't be good.
Mitch McConnell's proudest moment is the pride of getting away with grand larceny or murder. He stole from millions of Americans their right to a supreme court seat filled by the president they voted for. He murdered democracy by refusing to take the required actions outlined in the constitution to set up hearings and a vote for a supreme court presidential nominee.
1
Mitch McConnell launched his cynical ploy to delay seating a Supreme Court pick right in the midst of what we now know was Russian interference in our election: Russian funding of the GOP via the NRA, Russians hacking and releasing emails, Russians meeting up with candidate Trump's campaign to provide assistance. Why would the GOP delay seating Merrick Garland when Hillary Clinton looked to be a shoe-in? It makes no sense, unless they knew something the rest of us didn't. Will we be able to undo what could be 40 years of future damage once we finally get to the bottom of the Russian / GOP conspiracy to steal the election and subvert the will of the American people? How will we ever recover from such a cynical blow to our democracy?
1
McConnell perpetrated a constitutional coup d'etat when he refused to bring President Obama's nominee Merrick Garland before the senate for a confirmation hearing.
The founders never considered that a single person could subvert the intent of the constitution in such a malicious manner.
There was no provision for impeaching McConnell for misfeasance and malfeasance. His intent initially was to make President Obama a one term president. He failed in that but his venom continued to poison the senate.
It is hard to imagine that Gorsuch has any integrity knowing how he obtained his position on the Supreme Court. If Gorsuch had any integrity he would have gone through the hearing process and then refused to take the position. His appointment was poisoned by McConnell. Given his mother, the apple didn't fall very far from the tree, now did it?
I am a retired Army officer and Vietnam Veteran who took an oath to protect the American constitution against foreign and domestic enemies. McConnell is an enemy of the American constitution.
Gorsuch is not a legitimate member of SCOTUS and must be removed before we can claim to have a valid government.
But who knows if or when that will happen? A lot of changes must happen first. We need Bunny Bonespurs and his so-called VP shoehorned out of government as well. And before THAT will ever happen...
We need to get a lot closer to that ideal of Freedom and Justice For All...or follow the descent into a one-dictator state along with Russia and most recently China.
If the Democrats win the Senate in 2018, hopefully they will have the fortitude to reprise the McConnell precedent.
The biggest mistake of Obama's career was not installing Garland on the Court. He should have told McConnell, "Well, it's your right to have Advise And Consent, but, since you have chosen to abdicate that right, Merrick Garland will be reporting for duty on Monday morning." - Period.
McConnell proved one thing - He's one of the biggest practitioners of the world's oldest profession that Washington has ever seen.
1
Our Constitutional checks and balances have been thrown by the wayside as massive amounts of dark money has flowed into the political process, Organized voter suppression, financed by this dark Citizens United money, under the highly successful Karl Rove-managed REDMAP gerrymandering program is an excellent example of the subversion of our democracy.. There are no checks and balances when a Senate majority headed by Mitch McConnell, elected by less than a national majority vote in 2012, refused to allow President Obama to have his Supreme Court nomination voted on by the Senate as mandated by the Constitution.
Mitch McConnell's proudest moments (plural) haver been every occasion he has used to spit on the Constitution of the United States. He and Paul Ryan both stand behind Donald Trump who they know full well is a disgrace to our nation. Pride? No. Shame ..Yes!!
1
I find this to be one of the most appalling 1984ish deceptions ever perpetrated by the left. Were the law to be changed to say that someone must join a religious organization, or a pro-life group, or any other group except a left-leaning union, the howls of "coercion!" would deafen the universe. But forced to join/pay for a union? Oh, great idea.
This has actually happened to me. And I acquiesced because I needed the job. But my rights of free association were utterly violated by being forced into an organization I did not want to belong to, and whose political values were directly counter to my own. It is outrageous and a violation of the core founding principles of the United States.
The left's hypocrisy about this is mind-boggling.
1
Theft by taking. Theft by deception. No matter what you call it, it was unprecedented and beyond the pale. The term of a president is four years. It’s not three years and a month. How this was allowed to happen in the first place it just as bad as the result.
The people had voted - for Mr. Obama. But apparently Mitch doesn’t really care about the masses. He just cares about power.
All over the Country, Republican lawmakers are destroying American Democracy so they can turn America into something both alien and familiar to our Founding Fathers...a wealthy white male dominated society with indentured servants.
Mitch McConnell took away the People's right to have the Supreme Court justice that America's then elected President selected in favor of giving Conservatives their biggest reason to turn out at the poles. Too bad McConnell and other Republicans cherry pick which Constitutional Rights they'll uphold. McConnell and his ilk are not patriots, they're down right UNAmerican.
1
President Obama granted us two extreme left jurists to go along with the one we already had. The NYT version of a "moderate" is a bit jaded. We didn't need a third one. The Party in power seeks an absolute and permanent power, the party not in power will do anything to seek the power.
3
Personally I think McConnell should be prosecuted for his behavior. Why isn't his refusal to perform his Constitutional duties simply illegal? He ignored the will of the people, which one had thought is paramount in a democracy. We elected President Obama twice. We did so for many reasons, but among those reasons was the Supreme Court.
So the majority spoke.
And Mitch McConnell threw our votes right back in our faces. It wasn't even the insult to President Obama nor the disgraceful treatment of Merrick Garland - but rather the fact that the people represented by Obama and by our Senators and Representatives are being shafted.
Now, the GOP behind Trump doesn't even pretend to try and govern the whole of America. They are only playing to the so-called base, and imposing one-party tyranny, tyranny of the minority.
This is counter to our core principle. America was founded as a nation where the people rule. Mitch McConnell flaunted that principle and he should be held accountable for it.
188
WHY didn't Obama complain ???
WHY didn't Democrats suggest impeachment of McConnell- he was not carrying out his Constitutional duties ???
We should hold all Republicans accountable for the Garland fiasco, for their utterly disgraceful and disrespectful refusal to even meet with him. A disgusting corruption of everything we supposedly stand for!
1
There are two reasons Mitch McConnell ;wasn't held accountable by the democrats for flaunting the rules and traditions of the Senate in his halting the process to confirm Mr. Garland to the Supreme Court.
The first is because in general -- and in this specific case as well -- there's no law against failing to do your job. Voters can vote you out, that's about it. Democracy in America depends on Republican Senators not doing undemocratic evil things, and what the Republicans in this case did was undemocratic and evil. How evil? Who's to say? But this was a bad deed because it undermined the principle that the Senate is supposed to follow the rules which for the history of the nation has been to "advise and consent" on Supreme Court nominees, not simply refuse all action. Note that Republicans Senators never said the "advise and consent" rule needed changing. Instead they simply refused to to act.
The second is that the Democrats decided not to make a huge issue of it. They complained, but that's about it. There are plenty of ways to the Democrats could have shone a white hot spotlight on the Republican destruction of tradition and the rule of law and fair governing practices, yet without the votes (Senate was 54/46 Republican at the time) Garland would not have been confirmed.
One wonders what may happen after the midterms if the Democrats retake the Senate -- they would then be in a position to do exactly the same and block *ALL* of Trump's nominees.
1
You know, it's quite possible to be pro unions in their classic worker-vs-company configuration and be very wary of public-sector unions which are more worker-vs-politician situations in which politicians are rewarded for pro-union action by votes from public union member and their friends. The classic union provides a healthy tension between competing interests. The public sector union is more a collusive shakedown. So, up with classic unions and their legendary fight for workers' rights, and down with these bizarre Franken-unions and their corrosive drain on our public treasuries.
4
McConnell did what he did because he had the backing of his Republican co-conspirators and they dared they could get away with. And, they did. Who challenged McConnell? Calling him names is futile. What did the Democratic Party do to stop him? Sitting on their hands in a vote means nothing to the majority party. One commenter here (Bruce Rosenblit) said if he were president he would have had McConnell arrested and put on trial for treason. And, even if we, the people, lost, we would at least force him to present his case in court. If only, Mr. Rosenblit. So, where were the great legal minds of the country to challenge him? Trump signs an executive order without due process to end DACA. Prosecutors in California and New York challenged him in Federal court. Trump does an end run to the Supreme Court which by law could do nothing -- denied -- because what Trump did and how he did it was UN-lawful. The media spent all of 2016 repeating everything Trump said. There was little focus on what McConnell and the Republicans were doing to usurp the Constitutional right of the President. Obviously, Trump was a lot more entertaining.
We cannot re-visit the Supreme Court appointment of Gorsuch, but we can stay woke to the incoming attacks on our republic by those who favor greed over democracy. It should be over our dead voter bodies that Donald J. Trump remains as president until 2025.
2
Please remember it was not just McConnell. In October 2016, John McCain (yes, that John McCain) said: "I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up..."
The Republicans were okay with an 4-4 split. They would wait it out until they had a more favorable 'Republican' political landscape to fill the court with their nominees.
It's not just McConnell, it's Republican standards and practices writ large. Lie, cheat, and steal - it's the Republican Way.
2
No money should be able to be donated to any political candidate. Have publicly funded head to head debates by the candidates only. The candidates can then use their "free speech" at the podium to convince their voters that they are the best to govern their "districts" citizens.
Partisan politics in Citizens United that is now destroying our democracy has turned me cold on the Supreme Court's ability to be impartial and to debate law, rather than siding with a political party. I have lost faith in the government. I have lost faith in the Supreme Court.
1
Again (and again) ... The popular vote is a nice consolation prize but that is all it is. Hillary Clinton was the least electable (not necessarily least qualified) Democratic candidate who did not show up for the campaign. and that is why Donald Trump is president, and in turn why Gorsuch and not an even more liberal justice than Garland is not on the Supreme Court today. McConnell rolled the dice and won, let's take ownership of that and stop the whining.
The logic that justifies fair-share fees on the basis that the government has more control of employees' speech is tortured at best. It is a crutch being used to protect workers from themselves. A more apt analogy is public radio/TV. People enjoy the benefits whether or not they contribute but if enough choose to free ride the station ceases broadcasting and everyone suffers. Workers will have to engage in the critical thinking necessary to evaluate the benefits of unionizing. If they fail to do so in sufficient quantity then they will all suffer the consequences.
2
I am no fan of Mitch McConnell or Gorsich. However, the idea of being forced to contribute to Unions against my will is offensive. The free rider argument cannot possibly justify government sanctioned forced financing of collective bargaining schemes. Socialism by government fiat ?
I am sorry, you picked the wrong case to make your Judge Gorsich point. I agree with him and Scalia on this one.
Much more concerning are Gorsich' views on right to chose, immigration etc.
3
One longs for the days back in the 90’s, when voters who were uncomfortable with Bill Clinton’s alleged behavior made no bones about the fact that they voting for a Supreme Court nominee. Turns out we got Ginsburg.
. Its no wonder the "me too" movement gets so much (well deserved) traction in today's society, when even the NYT Editorial board doesn't understand the meaning of the word "consent." The Senate has a constitutional duty to advise and consent on supreme court nominations It doesn't mean rubber stamp, or succumb under pressure, it actually means to affirmatively agree. The senate had no duty to succumb to the pressure of liberal elite, and consent to a justice that even by the Time's own estimation would have been the second most liberal on the court. Those are the consequences of winning and losing elections.
2
This editorial is exactly correct about the ultraconservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, the unlawful way Majority Leader engineered his nomination and confirmation, the threat to labor unions – particularly public-employee unions – and the likely result of the case currently pending in the Supreme Court.
It is time for liberals and moderates to think outside the box.
If the message can be sold effectively about the true nature of the authoritarian, anti-democratic and disloyal administration of Donald Trump and about the hypocritical, corrupt Republican politicians in both the Senate and the House, the ability of this Supreme Court to destroy the lives of working people will be diminished and, over time, eliminated.
If compelling me to pay unions fees violates my first amendment rights...what else constitutes speech? Does forcing me to have armed teachers and guards at my school, when I abhor guns, not violate the same principal? Are we going to argue that gun ownership isn't political (surely not)?
"the importance of letting Americans “have a voice in the selection” by voting"
Time to pay back. It is important for Democrats to stall any immigration bill, to let people vote in the midterm first.
1
Freedom of Association prohibits government from interfering with what groups a person may join. It has nothing to do with the private sector pressuring individuals to associate with organized labor. It's no more unconstitutional than expecting a medical doctor to join the AMA. There is no First Amendment issue here.
Terrible. Mitch McConnell's reign of obstructionist terror will not play well in history. All the disaffected people who voted for Trump will never get it. Unions are not perfect, but nothing is, and "right to work" is even more imperfect. As a card-carrying member of three unions, AEA, SAG-AFTRA, and AGVA, I thank the people who paid so dearly with their struggles and in some cases, lives, so that workers had any kind of leverage and protections. I do not, however, think that anyone should be forced to join a union, or should have to pay dues when working in a company that has both union and nonunion, but the nonunion person should not have the same protections or reap the benefits, either.
2
The playing fields of unions are seriously threatened by this court. It is a shame that A does not follow B meaning that if you do not contribute to the Union, the Union does not benefit the non-payer. The Unions could set up systematic harassment of the freeloaders and I would support that.
Mitch McConnell represents the worst elements in our present political environment. His 'win at all costs' strategies not only eliminated the vote that should have been allowed for Mr. Garland, and his refusal to allow the collected intelligence reports to be made available for the voter to review that the intelligence groups had revealing the evidence of the Russian meddling of the 2016 elections was a dereliction of duty to protect our country. Now, we're at this sad chapter of our American history.
1
Public sector unions represent a conflict of interest and should be abolished.
2
Yes it sounds like the ranting of a conspiracy theorist; so be it. I can't imagine McConnell ever would have handed Hillary Clinton a Supreme Court nomination. In other words, he know that the election would have forces tipping the scales in the direction of a Republican.
As long as we're in the norm-busting business, how about 11 seats on the court, courtesy of Democratic control of government in 2021?
1
Beyond the fact that McConnell is a moral cipher and that Gorsuch showed his lack of character by accepting the stolen seat, my question, specific to the Janus case, is this: whatever happened to the conservatives' abhorrence of "takers", which is exactly what the non-dues-paying beneficiaries of union efforts are.
1
This is one of those issues that causes my knees to bend in the wrong direction as I try to resolve my pro-union beliefs with my opposition to this particular pro-union position.
Here's why...
Public sector unions, for all the benefits they confer on its members, are one of --- if not the most prominent --- reasons for the demise of public infrastructure. The formula is very simple: It is an inherent conflict of interest to have elected public officials negotiating pay and benefits with the very same public sector unions who hold the power to support or oppose them. Forcing employees who do not want to join or support the union reinforces the union's power to support or oppose elected officials who will then sit across from them at the negotiating table. For stark evidence of this conflict of interest look no further than the debilitated budgets of many California cities, where more than 50% of the money goes to pay for employee compensation, including bloated retirement packages festooned with spiking provisions, while the roads crumble and schools are chronically under-funded.
The First Amendment argument, well-settled by SCOTUS precedent makes sense to my pro-union sympathies. What I can't get past is the sense that, as with gun control background checks for buying assault weapons, we're arguing about a secondary issue and ignoring the rot at the core: Much of this would be resolved if public sector unions were prohibited from political activity.
3
The unions are the last barrier between us and the elite overlords. They are our last defense. I have been a union member and not a union member (depending on when/where I worked) and I can tell you flat out that working where a union exist is better, safer, and pays more. Now I am a boss but I still say that a union is on the side of good. (and please don't bother to send in comments about corrupt unions and union officials. I know they exist as they exist in every other organization in existence.)
3
We were bamboozled by the likes of Mitch McConnell, hopeful that with HRC as President, all sins would be forgiven.
Didn't quite turn out the way I and many had hoped...
Public-sector unions are a problem, as even FDR knew, and mightn't should exist at all. They are almost impossible for Democrats to truly confront; they make government more costly, less efficient; low-end workers' pay and benefits greatly exceed what comparable private-sector workers receive. These unions have an obvious incentive to keep government bloated. How is that NOT an issue, when it's taxpayers who pay for this?
Those fees The Times mentioned, they're often close to 100% of dues. In this case, the agency fee is 78% of dues. As George Will reminds us, there's little adversarial relationship in public-sector collective bargaining; the government negotiates with itself. Because of public-sector unions' political power, they sometimes elect their own bosses. Note the fiscal problems created by their refusal, all too often, to even consider mild reforms.
This isn't about being "pro-worker." These unions' makeup is rather different from what most people think of when they hear "union." Private-sector workers will in time be, have been before, and in many cases are right now hurt by what public-sector unions do. Let's not reside in the Land of Make Believe: There is no distinct line between public-sector unions' political activities and collective bargaining. As private-sector unions have withered, the public variety have bloomed, with, on the whole, insalubrious repercussions.
Our future shouldn't be our past. We need new ideas to help workers.
2
The elected politician accepting the public employee union’s campaign donation money and other support is not forfeiting any of the politician’s money to pay for union employee’s increased pay and benefits, he is giving away the taxpayers money to the union members.
The politician is giving away the taxpayer's money to help him collect future political contributions for his personal political re-election expenses from the government employee's unions.
Private sector union and non-union employees negotiate with business owners to get more of the business owner's money into the employee’s pockets, and this is OK by me.
The financial and business problems in most all local governments are a result of continued conflicts of interest associated with the incestuous relationships between the elected politicians running the local governments and the unions representing the tax-supported employees, various no-bid contracts awarded to political contributors, Legal Service contracts, CPA service contracts, Architect & Engineer contracts, Real Estate agent contracts, Building Maintenance contracts, and other no-bid contracts which have been going on for many years at all levels of government.
Why should current taxpayers honor union contracts that were obtained in the past by the public employee unions who influenced previous public officials (with political contributions) to obligate current taxpayers to pay for their extravagant wages and benefits!
2
Folks, let's just face the real facts. The United States of America has been turned into a third rate nation by 23 years of mostly unbroken control of the Congress by Republican conservatism. That period of control, along with the scorched earth politics used to gain that control, is what resulted in McConnell's unprecedented and duplicitions abrogation of responsibility to abide by the Constitution.
We are living in times where the tenets of democracy are under assault. Lies are more than commonplace, they are the driving force of life under conservative control. When process is abandoned for power, no justification for action is required. When honor dies, so does democracy.
The coming 2018 election will not provide a panacea. At best, it will be a pause.
The only thing that can save this country is for citizens to take to heart the notion that freedom emanates from truth. That truth is not whatever you happen to believe, but an objective reality that separates right from wrong. Truth relies on observable fact; on reality, not prevarication.
Once we regain truth, only then can our country regain its honor.
I am reminded of an interview I heard with the authors of the book How Democracies Die by Levitsky and Ziblatt.
They spoke of "forbearance" as being necessary for a functioning democracy. This is evidenced when a party does NOT do something just because they can. Mcconnell has failed this test and our country.
1
Unfortunately, this is what happens when a supreme court pick gets stolen by the opposite party when they control both houses. Imagine if the Democrats refused to let a Republican president choose a supreme court judge when there is a vacancy.
Yes, this court case is trying to get rid of unions, because they stand up for workers when it comes to wages, benefits and working condition. Unions are against corporations, due to increasing their amount of expenses, reducing their overall profit.
Let us look at Europe. Countries like Sweden and Denmark, according to OCED statistics from 2015, have at least 70% of their entire workforce in a union. The United States, meanwhile, only had 12% of the workforce in a union, comprising of mainly teachers, police officers and federal employees.
While I support increased union membership, at the same time, there should be some reform in unions. Unfortunately, from having some relatives being in a union, there is abuse when seeking protection from the unions. If you are a bad employee, you should be fired.
It is funny on how Trump always talks about bringing coal jobs back, as well as the manufacturing jobs from China and Mexico. Trump is confused. Why would we want people to suffer from health conditions like black lungs and broken backs? Trump actually wants the high pay and good benefits that these workers used to experience in the past with these types of jobs.
I wonder where they came...?
GOP hyperpartisanship chips away at the American ideal of a government for all the people, and McConnell's blocking of any Obama choice is one of the most heinous results.
We know in advance how Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch will vote on issues regardless of precedent. The same is true of Alito and Thomas. The scales of justice are thus skewed for a generation until there is a confluence of a democratic president and a judge's demise.
Justice Sotomayor speaks of the 'world's plutocrats' but in reality this case deals with Public Unions and their efforts to control bargaining through cash and kind paid to the Democratic Party. How many cities and states are near bankruptcy due to retiree pension and healthcare costs. Much needed current public services are diminished to pay for retired workers!
1
Sometimes I can't help but think that this nation has crossed some sort of Rubicon wherein the idea—the very notion—of government of, by and for The People has simply been abandoned to rank politics and the quest for power by a small minority of very wealthy individuals and businesses. I wonder if the republic itself has simply run out of gas; and that the ordinary citizen with a vote to cast has lost the understanding of how important participating in democracy is. Disinterest, aided and abetted by massive amounts of private and corporate money, has resulted in cynicism and feelings of helplessness and political inevitability.
Then I think of those incredible high schoolers in Florida.
1
Let's say the Dems are lucky enough to flip the senate AND there's a vacancy on the Supreme Court much like when Scalia died. If Dems hold off choosing that replacement using the same reasoning that McConnell used, what will the Republicans say? I will bet they will get bent out of shape and in the process declare that what McConnell did was different.
Apart from another dreaded McConnell moment, we must come up with a better and more fair method for choosing who sits on our highest court. Obvious to me, nominations by POTUS is not a viable solution. Maybe we need an application and review committee process run by the American Bar Assn. Who else would know their members better?
1
"Any burden the fees impose on employees' First Amendment rights is justified by the need to eliminate free riders."
Did I read that correctly? A newspaper saying the First Amendment isn't sacrosanct? Amazing.
The ed board also says that this is about corporate interests. No, it's about public sector unions. Private sector unions have all but disappeared. And where I live, union barbers in prisons are making six figures for cutting hair. Unskilled union laborers working government jobs are getting $40 an hour, plus Cadillac health insurance, plus pensions. And they have the gall to describe themselves as middle class and guardians of middle class lifestyles.
This would be all well and good, except folks like me, who don't belong to unions and don't work for the government and don't make six figures are paying for it. Unions whine about contracting out work that used to be done by government employees. What other choice is there, given the monumental cost of government-employed labor?
There's a pendulum here, and it's swung too far in the direction of public sector unions and public sector union employees.
McConnell's refusal to offer "advice and consent" on the Merrick Garland nomination wasn't "a cynical ploy," as your Editorial Board writes. It was illegal and in violation of the Constitution.
I wish the Times' Editorial Board might have spoken up more pointedly when McConnell and the Republican Senate was in the process of stealing the court pick. It might have been helpful to have more mainstream voices noting the act at the time, not two years later.
Please note, by the way, that the Constitutional language on Supreme Court appointments is far clearer than the language on any individual right to bear arms.
Justice Gorsuch should do the right thing and resign.
1
Mitch McConnell does not believe in democracy. The public should be reminded of this continually. He represents the worst of politics. He does not believe in majority vote only in advancing his fact-free assault on basic human values.
1
Let us hope that the American voting public will have learned just what McConnell and his Republican majority have given this country. McConnell and his majority can be voted out of office and replaced by a 21st Century progressive majority which can still turn things around and really make America Great Again. Despite some past stumblings, like the Iraq and Afghan wars and other egregious international meddling America was great before Trump was elected. Let's all get MAGA hats and vote in November to replace this 19th Century Republican Congress with a progressive body that will get us back on the Path of Progress not the path to destruction we have been on since Trump's election.
Republicans who tend to favor business owners preferences over employees’ hate unions. No surprise there.
But the problem for every society since industrial capitalism arose is that without unions negotiating for labor, employees, union members or not, their compensation and working conditions collapse to subsistence which drags down all, including the owners. Some owners are extremely intelligent and thoughtful people who can understand that their long term interests are with all prospering together, but they are too few in comparison to most who want all that they can grab now without a bit of thought for the consequences they do not consider seriously.
Nobody on the Supreme Court really has much interest in sums, so when it comes to issues like these they tend just not to grasp the whole context of their decisions.
Someone needs to remind McConnell and the other GOP members who put party before country that WE THE PEOPLE means PEOPLE, not party, not the NRA, not Corporations (despite the Citizens United SCOTUS decision).
WE also need to remember that the privilege to vote is also an obligation to participate in our democracy. That means actually spending some time considering the implications of voting on one issue instead of a broader view, sometimes compromising, and sometimes choosing the lesser of two choices. But too many Americans just don't bother. Remember that song, "This Land is Your Land, This Land is My Land"? THAT is what patriotism is about. You protect your home, your cars, your children, your job, your way of life. Without the foundation of a strong, united country, all of the things we hold dear are in peril. VOTE!
McConnell's cynical power play enabled him to get another ultra right jurist Gorsuch on the Supreme Court.
Now the judicial activists can further decimate the power of public unions by weakening them financially.
They will likely ignore precedent and follow their political
beliefs to further the corporate and religious right agenda. This will further erode our democratic principles since over time the majority of American will have a much more progressive vision of the future and will desire more social and income equality.
Just another tragedy for American democracy.
2
Many of the commentors seem confused with union dues and voluntary contributions to PAC's. As a (very) recently retired Federal employee and 30 year union dues paying member I cannot make this more clear. Union dues are used protect ALL members of a recognized union, regardless of membership status. It is called DFR, or Duty of Fair Representation. If a union fails to represent a non paying member it opens itself up to unnecessary and costly legal issues.
Perhaps the most important thing to remember is public sector union dues may never be used for political purposes. A member may choose to contribute to an established and recognized PAC, but is never forced to. In fact, to even discuss PAC's are illegal to even talk about at work, whether you are "on the clock" or not. All political work done by a the legislative arm, per law, must be done away from work, be uncompensated for and outside that employees working hours.
So, in brief, union dues are used to fight for the rights and benefits of ALL members of a bargaining unit, regardless of an indivduals desire to pay dues or not. And ANY political work done by a union is through a PAC-never on the governments' dime or time. Failure to comply is a violation of the Hatch Act. "PAC" may not even mentioned, in any form, at work. Not on a coffee or lunch break. NEVER!
Unions fight for all workers, so I strongly recommend joining. If your political views differ from that of your union stay out of the PAC.
1
Since the 19th century unions have had a proper place in evening the playing field in dealing with management. Unions have become successful when they stick to bread and butter issues like pay and working conditions but when they get into radical politics (usually the far left) their focus is lost and the leadership no longer represents the wishes of its own members.
My own union leadership has gotten into stuff like supporting anti-Israel boycotts and thrown money to support radical politicians that I don't want to see my dues go to. My wife's union (the UFT) has damaged the education of children through its control of politicians as well as departments of educatation that results in a system where you cannot get rid of bad teachers while you can't reward good ones.
The marshmallow test comes to mind, the one in which children are asked to forgo one marshmallow for the promise of two marshmallows in the future. Anti-union folks are the former, opting for one marshmallow immediately (say, not paying dues, YES!) while union folks are fighting for the greater benefit (higher wages, better hours, health care) evident only in the long run. Democracy is a process, not instant gratification. It is a real and lasting shame that those conservatives with the loudest voices don't seem to understand or even care.
Actually, it's not really the fault of Mitch McConnell or anyone else, that this case is before the Court. It's the fault of the plaintiff, clear and simple. This man, who doesn't believe that the collective bargaining power of the Union benefits him in any way, and therefore refuses to pay to support it, is the reason why the Unions are in trouble. It's become a common theme now, among the working class, that they imagine themselves all as nascent millionaires, or entrepreneurs, who are all just waiting for their big break to become mini moguls. Remember "Joe the Plumber"? The one who felt as if he should fight for tax cuts for the rich, because some day he was going to be rich? Yes, so this "plaintiff" doesn't want to be forced to pay to support his rights to a pension, health care, over time, holiday pay, etc. Nope, because he's going to be a rich man some day, maybe a factory owner himself, and he wants to be able to freely express his greed as the rich are doing now.
1
We are living in unprecedented times. We are living with a President who is more than likely illegitimate. It will take a long time to comprehend the Russian influence, not only on the election but on our very way of life. When it is determined that Trump would not have won without Russian help, everything should be restored to a pre Trump situation. Restore Obama care, return the safe guards on the environment, the National Parks, etc. and remove Gorsuch from the Supreme Court. Why should it be any other way?
The fact is that McConnell didn't know what the outcome of the presidential election would be when he made the decision to tube Garland's nomination. At the time, many pundits speculated that, with Hillary Clinton enjoying a huge lead in campaign finance and sophistication, McConnell had made a huge mistake. For the Times to assert that McConnell had some sort of clarirvoyant knowledge of the outcome of the election is more than a bit of a stretch.
If the Times editorial writers think that teachers unions with multi-million dollar campaign finance war chests are protected by the Constitution, perhaps they would like to send their children to California's dysfunctional public schools and/or contribute toward the massive deficit in our state teachers's retirement system.
The fact is that most interest groups must persuade their members and supporters to contribute to their causes. I lead one such group and must persuade my members to voluntarily pay their dues each year. While I might like to have the unions' current authority to extract mandatory dues, I know that, over the long term, the fact that my members have a choice makes the organization I lead more effective and responsive to its membership. The public employee unions will too. Therein lies the irony.
It is stomach-turning and frightening to realize that there is truly nowhere Republicans will stop in their quest for permanent power. Our democracy is in grave danger.
1
If Schumer and the Democrats had any courage, they would have fought for censuring McConnel as soon he made clear that he would not seat an Obama nominee. Besides the fact that McConnel's actions were clearly contrary to the constitutional oath he swore to uphold, the loss of a Supreme Court seat is arguably more consequential than the presidency, since Justices will serve for a lifetime and guide the laws that affect all citizens.
I don't understand the cowardice of the Democrats. Unless they called McConnel to task through real action, and not just speeches, they allowed McConnel to circumvent the constitution.
1
Why President Obama refused to challenge Mitch McConnell (as he and other constitutional lawyers were encourage to do by myself) is an ongoing puzzle to me. The Constitution clearly specified the Senates duty: "...shall advise and consent". By failing to hold a hearing or schedule a vote McConnell clearly violated the US Constitution! That is his legacy. If the Democrats ever gain control their first act should be to impeach McConnell.
1
There's is nothing in the Constitution that mandates that there should only be nine Unites States Supreme Court Justices. The number of justices has always been set by Congress. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress set the number at six justices. Then in 1807, Congress set the number at 7, then eventually to nine in 1837, and as high as 10 in 1863. However, in 1866, the Judicial Circuits Act reduced the number to 7 but eventually, in 1869, under the Judiciary Act, Congress finally settled on nine justices, where it has remained ever since. Ever mindful of tradition, Congress has long been adverse to depart from this traditional number of justices even spurning, in 1937, Franklin D. Roosevelt's suggestion to "pack the Court' with additional justices to facilitate passage of New Deal legislation. However, now after McConnell's highly cynical and successful ploy to prevent Merrick Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court, contrary to Congress' long standing tradition of considering a sitting President's Supreme Court nominee, the Democrats (if and when they re-take Congress) should stop being slaves to "tradition" themselves, and seriously re-consider whether or not it should increase the number justices on the bench. This way, the Republicans will finally come to regret McConnell's shortsighted theft of Garland's seat on the bench.
We can rest assured that at some point in the future the Dems will get that seat back. If they take back the Senate in 2018 Trump will never have another appointment, no matter how many years he is in the presidents seat. McConnell set the precedent. Repubs, and the entire country, will ultimately regret it and see him for the utterly corrupt political that he is.History books in 50 years will have a special section about how the Republican Party became so corrupt.
By McConnell;'s logic, if a seat on the Sepreme Court becomes open, the seat can't bar filled until after the next presidential election. Since Trump has announced a re-election bid, technically he is now involved in a campaign.
1
Historians will note McConnell's gambit - and the fact that it was allowed to succeed - as the central tipping point of 21st century democracy. Not 9/11, not the crash of 2008, not Russian infiltration of U.S. elections and insertion of a Russian operative into the Oval Office. McConnell's gambit signaled with clarity the eventual power-grab by right-wing ultra-extremism, and the eagerness of citizens to give their freedoms away to religious zealots and corporate power brokers.
Neil Gorsuch took his seat on the highest court in the land by dint of the greatest procedural injustice in the history of the Republic.
That’s just Wrong, i.e. Unjust.
Let's be clear-eyed about the stand-off over Merrick Garland. There were two protagonists: Mitch McConnell, who held his ground, and President Obama, who caved. The Times Editorial Board and other apologists for establishment Democrats need to let go of the overused narrative that President Obama was powerless against the Republican Senate and its odious leader. Just imagine if instead of sitting on his hands and blindly assuming that a victorious Hillary Clinton would renominate Garland or another center-left jurist, President Obama had used his bully pulpit to take the fight for his nominee to the people. Just think what might have happened if he'd made a prime-time speech to push for a Senate vote on Garland's nomination and embarked on a series of public appearances to explain to the citizenry at large that the Senate's refusal to consider the nominee was historically unprecedented and antithetical to the principles of our Constitution. Leaders are supposed to lead, and as a lame duck president, there was no political reason for President Obama not to fight tooth and nail to get Garland onto the bench. If he had, we might now have a consequentially different Supreme Court that, as the Times notes, probably wouldn't be considering the public unions case at all and from which we would expect more decisions oriented to the center and left for years to come.
2
Democrats tend to do or not do just enough to allow the Republicans to have their way. We may reasonably conclude it is a perennial game of good cop bad cop. Especially on labor issues. This goes all the way back to the Forties, when the two parties joined forces to pass the Taft Harley Act. At that time the charade included a veto by President Truman which Democrats helped override. Nowadays we have the cloture rule which seems to appear and disappear when an excuse for Democrat fecklessness is called for.
One of the great core weaknesses of the union movement, in my long experience of union activism, is the pervasive and narrow minded conservatism of a significant swathe of the membership which fails to comprehend the interests of the collective over those of the individual. As a result of constant, complex, and perfidious social programming, albeit aided by wilful ignorance of reality, the working class has been inveigled into believing that if they emulate the rich in thought and deed, one day they will be rich too. The truth is appallingly stark, however. Wages are plummeting, working conditions rife with repression and harassment. Barring a miracle, a lottery win perhaps, the worker will wallow in delusion in perpetuity.
Unfortunately, Mark Janus is not a unique phenomenon: he constitutes a small but vocal opinion that exploits the inherent fragility of the union movement, namely the membership clique that buys into conservative smoke and mirrors. Lofty talk of free speech etc, clouds the collective benefits that Janus undoubtedly enjoys over his minuscule comparative interests. By dressing up mutton as lamb, pretending that free speech is more important than a group health plan, the union is sacrificed one betrayal at a time in a death of a thousand cuts. In the long run, subversives like Janus will suffer. Using his hard won free speech, he'll be able to bemoan all the losses he incurs as his employer in turn betrays his loyalty. That's how treachery works.
The Democratic icon FDR was against public employee unions. They are very different than private unions but most commentators here seem oblivious to that. In many instances, they effectively elect the parties on the other side of the negotiating table and uniformly support the expansion of government (more union dues), which of course most of the “bosses” do as well (more votes). The Federal unions only exist since the early 60s because of JFK payback to unions for help getting him elected, long after most of the worst working conditions that led to the creation of private unions had been history for at least several decades. And now union contracts are bleeding many governments dry, forcing painful reductions of public services. If i were a governmemt employee I would greatly resent being forced to pay for the unions’ liberal, expansionist agenda. I am also a taxpayer and a citizen entitled to oppose killing the golden goose.
When did "balance" equate with "justice?" The argument should proceed based on the constitution. The decision should be based on the constitution. Rewrite the First Amendment and pass a "balanced" revision if this decision displeases progressive expectations.
I am disturbed but not surprised by the comments here that blame Gorsuch and the Republican court not just on Jill Stein but on Nader, srom the 200o election. All I can say is stop it. Gore didn’t lose because of Nader voters in Florida, The hanging chadd and the butterfly ballots in Palm Beach County playedan even bigger role. Besides if Gore had won his own home state of Tennesssee and Clinton’s stage of Arkansas it wouldn’t have been an issue. Even if you look at the Nader voters in Florida, there is no guarantee that they would have voted for Gore. Some might have voted for Bush or just stayed home.
The same goes for Stein voters. Many of them might have stayed home or even voted for Trump. There are many possible reasons Clinton might have lost, voter suppression, hacking of the machines, the Russians, and Clinton’s failure to campaign more in states like Wisconsin and Michigan. To blame Stein voters primarily for her lose is not only absurd but dangerous. The Democrats have to work against voter suppression and try to nominate a candidate who will inspire people and make them want to vote for her or him. Stop blaming voters who exercise their right to vote for whomever they wish. On another note Obama could have nominated Garland as a recess appointee, which was apparently legal. He would have lasted at least a year. So Obama is at least partly to blame for this mess
1
The Republicans, the evangelicals, corporate interests and Trump have been crowing about the seating of Gorsuch as one their greatest accomplishment during the first year of the Trump presidency. It is more like an open wound that may never heal. McConnell, who presumably loves the institution, the Senate, has soiled it, possibly irrevocably, and soiled our democratic system - denying a president who won both the popular and electoral college his historical and political right to seat. In doing so, McConnell stole my vote and the votes of millions of others. Now we can expect Gorsuch to do what he was paid to do, which will further soil the Supreme Court casually overturning precedent - one would hope that at least a super majority would be required to overturn a unanimous decision. But no, this is the era of crass political power that has now thoroughly infected the courts as well.
As much of a threat to democracy that Trump represents, he's an accidental agent of change, more of a symptom of the bi-partisanism that is the real threat. McConnel, on the other hand, took a purposeful swing at the rule of law and our democratic ideals when he ignored 150 years of precedent and refused to consider the sitting president's choice for supreme court. If "Destroyer of Democracy" has a face, it's McConnel's jowly image.
I am not sure of the legal remedies available, but it is clear that Mitch McConnell has no respect for the rule of law or his pledge to uphold the constitution. These are serious crimes against our country, and he deserves to be held accountable.
“All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.
It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management.
The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. .......... and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.
Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees.
Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount.
Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied.
Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable.”
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Letter on the Resolution of Federation of Federal Employees Against Strikes in Federal Service, signed August 16, 1937"
The non-union folks who hate unions because they are uninformed, are going to have to swallow some bitter medicine when the correlation between union wages and non-union wages starts to align. Once the unions are defeated everyone's wages and benefits will get cut and be decreased. You'll work longer hours have little to no recourse against abusive employers. This is Koch Brothers race to the bottom strategy 101, and thanks to Trump and the "So called Republicans" we are poised to win!!
Mitch McConnell's action to deny President Obama the choice of a Supreme Court justice is on a par with his attempt to prevent Congress from doing anything during Obama's presidency. Neither is the action of a responsible citizen of the country.
Simply put, Gorsuch's improper seating on the Supreme Court was accomplished via an unconstitutional process. Therefore, he lacks the basic authority to remain as a siting Supreme Court Justice. Somehow this political "theft" must be legally challenged, perhaps by an ancillary issue raised on cases that reach the Court or by a concerted action to impeach him.
President Obama had remarked how hypocritical it was for Republicans to claim fidelity to the Constitution while they thwarted his Constitutional duty to fill the Supreme Court.
However our highest court proceeds to rule with Gorsuch in a stolen seat, the Constitution itself has lost.
117
Gorsuch is now and will forever be an Injustice on the Court.
Mitch McConnell and every GOP senator serving in 2016 perpetrated a theft against the Constitution of the United States and the majority of the American people who voted for President Obama. Trump is a minority president who is only in office because of the anachronistic Electoral College.
Now, it is the duty of every American who cares about the republic to vote these thieves and liars out of office. If they do not pay a price at the polls, we will see this kind of thing again and again.
Give control of Congress to the Democrats in November.
Neil Gorsuch is a most worthy successor to Justice Antonin Scalia. Like Scalia he was educated at a Jesuit high school and Harvard Law School. Like his friend and mentor, Gorsuch will be the perfect counter-balance for Justice Sotomoyer, a far-left liberal activist who wants to create the law rather than interpret it.
It was interesting that when Senator McConnell was asked to seat Doug Jones early, the people of Alabama having spoken, he declined.
If there was ever an argument that money is free speech, union dues and the political speech they fund is the evidence.
The people are the sovereign in the United States. That is why the Constitution begins with “We the people” as the source of its authority. Of course, the people can be less than perfect from time to time, so the Founders used their experience in the colonies and states to guide the separation of powers. The underlying notion is that the rules need to be obeyed in order to provide for the common good.
The twists and turns of partisanship should have no place on the Supreme Court, yet with the connivance of Mitch McConnell, we now have a highly politicized majority on the Court seeking to overturn established precedents that do not fit their ideology.
The reason they can do that is their lifetime appointment status. But the Constitution is mute on judicial tenure, only noting that justices “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior”. That suggests that legislative remedies exist for changing lifetime appointment to fixed terms, perhaps without the possibility of renewal.
The current effort to pack the federal courts with political partisans and ill-prepared hacks suggests that a house cleaning will need to take place. The lack of “good Behavior” by the current majority of the Court should prompt changes to lifetime employment.
It only seems fair in the rise of the gig economy that federal judges and justices should stop getting a free ride. Time to pay the dues.
1
I understand perfectly how corporations and employers generally feel about unions. They'd rather not have them and their reasons are obvious. But I've always been a bit unsure about how blue-collar, middle-class Americans feel about unions. Steel workers, coal miners, city employees, truckers, etc.... I was under the impression that they were all rather enthusiastic about their unions. Is that not the case?
In an era of record corporate profits, reduced corporate taxes and no real movement on raising the minimum wage, wage growth is predictably lagging. Now, based on commentary here and elsewhere, it seems like middle-class conservatives don't particularly like unions. Other than sheer generosity, I'm struggling to understand what incentive any employer has to meaningfully raise wages to their employees under conservative policies. If retaining talent was sufficient motivation, wages would have risen already, but that's not the case. Exactly what bargaining power do middle-class, blue-collar American workers bring to the table when negotiating their pay?
1
A hypothetical, if McConnell had gained his ability to squelch any Supreme Court nominee not through a series of 100 individual elections, in which the 245,000 votes from Wyoming have the same weight as the 12 million votes from California, but through a national election of all 83 million voters who voted in the 2014 midterms, would doing so have been legitimate? If so, should the Democrats propose that the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee be filled by a national election?
Republicans are playing the long game and winning, big time, or is it "bigly." First, a Republican Supreme Court through Citizens United empowers corporations and labor unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on political speech. Second, Republicans provide a windfall to corporations by transferring wealth via the tax system from middle- and lower-income individuals. Third, Neil Gorsuch, occupying the Garland seat, votes to remove the funding from labor unions necessary to assert their rights under Citizens United. The next shoe to fall will be on the safety net; Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, leading to another windfall for the wealthy.
One hopes this contains the seeds of a liberal resurgence. If not, American plutocrats and oligarchs will soon resemble those of Trump's idol, Vladimir Putin.
3
I was a member of a public sector union for years. It was fairly powerless. We worked without contracts and without any increases for years and years. Unlike the private sector, going on strike is illegal.
The civil service pensions that were once seen as providing a modest retirement are now seen as extravagant because the private sector has abandoned the well-being of their employees altogether. Any pension at all is seen as incredibly extravagant. We seem to be on the wrong path in the US. It is not the public sector that needs reform but rather the private sector.
1
For a long time now, senate Republicans have had a DEEP sense of entitlement re judicial nominations......This was evident back in the Clinton administration, when several 9th Circuit nominees waited over 400 days for confirmation....But at least back then Majority Leader Trent Lott, though very conservative, actually believed a twice by landslide elected president deserved to have his nominees acted upon by the senate....
Unfortunately, President Obama was never afforded such courtesy by senate republicans....In addition to the Garland fiasco, Obama's lower court nominees routinely were blocked by the senate GOP....Finally, after senate republicans acted so egregiously by blocking Obama's 3 nominees to the high profile DC Circuit, Democrats said enough and voted to abolish the filibuster for lower court nominees.....Keep in mind, Senate GOPers blocked the seats merely because they were nominated by a Democrat....
If the Democrats take over the senate in November, they would be completely justified to put an "On Vacation" sign at the Senate Judiciary Committee until Jan 20, 2021..After all, the American people should allow the NEXT president to have a say in whose confirmed to the federal courts...
4