U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said Monday she feels daily “frustration” as conservative justices move the country to the ideological right.

In an appearance at the University of California, Berkely School of Law, Sotomayor was asked how she copes with the consistently conservative rulings from the court.

“Every loss truly traumatizes me,” but “I get up the next morning,” she said in response to the question, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The crowd — about 1,300 students — applauded.

In her remarks, she criticized her “originalist colleagues” whom she said have come up with “new ways to interpret the Constitution,” changing rulings “that some of us believed were well established,” the Chronicle reported.

The 6-3 conservative court has had an eventful couple of terms, making its mark on some of the most consequential aspects of everyday life — from overturning the federal right to an abortion to ruling affirmative action in colleges unconstitutional.

  • hark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    122
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    Expand the court. “But republicans will do the same” you might say. To that I say “okay, let the court be a million judges to show just how shitty and ridiculous it is, let it collapse under its own stupidity. Besides, the conservatives already control the court, so there’s really nothing to lose.”

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      My favored tactic is to – Bam! Expand the court to 11 in one year, than 13 in two. Nuke the filibuster if you have to.

      Then Democrats can sit down with Republicans and say “You can let us appoint 4 justices to lifetime terms and wait until you get the Presidency and both houses of Congress to expand it more, or you can work with us to pass an amendment to set up term limits and other reforms so the SC is no longer a political football”.

    • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      The main issue is confirmations. If enough Republicans hold the Senate, they can stall confirmation until their guy comes into office and then stuff the court further.

    • maness300@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Just ignore what they say if you don’t like it.

      If enough people do this, they won’t have any power. They literally cannot arrest us all.

      Look at what we did with marijuana.

      That said, this really only applies to states’ rights. California can disobey the supreme court without repercussion. Women can’t disobey abortion bans in their states unless the vast majority of them band together.

      The problem with that is, if the vast majority of them banded together then they could remove the bans in the first place.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        What was it that “we did with marijuana”? Because there are a shit load of people in prison that would be happy to know that the problem has been fixed.

        Edit: lol at this being controversial. Just to clarify: we haven’t fixed shit with respect to cannabis. We’ve barely put a band-aid on the problem. Yes I’m glad some states have explicitly gone against federal law, but you’re ignorant as fuck if you think we fixed the problem in any way.

        • maness300@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Marijuana is still illegal federally but states just ignore it.

          I’m downvoting you because this legitimately should not have to be said.

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I’m aware. You didn’t answer my question.

            Edit: maybe someone who downvoted can point out to me where they explain how we’ve solved the cannabis problems in the US. Because we definitely fucking haven’t. A handful of states literally breaking federal law isn’t a solution.

              • prole@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                You really didn’t answer me though… You really think we’ve solved the cannabis issue in the US? What world do you live in?

                • maness300@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Ahh, there’s the misunderstanding.

                  I never said we “solved” the cannabis issue. If you disagree, please quote where you think otherwise.

                  I stand by my point. You need to improve your reading comprehension.

        • guacupado@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          There are also a shit load of people who aren’t in there anymore because of what we did. Was it a complete solution? No, but with Republicans around nothing ever is.

  • 🖖USS-Ethernet@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    NO position should ever be for life. It’s ridiculous that we have 70/80/90 year olds running things forever until they die. They should retire and let the next generation take the reins. Age and term limits. Courts should not be able to be packed like this. Nothing should.

    • Poach@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      11 months ago

      They should also probably be held to some ethical standards, but that’s too much for the nation’s most powerful court/justices. Nevermind the US code of conduct says justices are to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

      But who needs a functional government or justice system? It’s just keeping big business from making even more money, and destroying the planet faster.

      • 🖖USS-Ethernet@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I wonder why we don’t elect judges like we do at the local level. What were the founding fathers thought process on allowing the president to appoint them?

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          The thought was that if they had to campaign and run for elections they’d be too swayed by political pressure to be impartial. As we’ve seen, having the Executive branch do it doesn’t prevent this if politics becomes hyper-partisan. This is part of why Washington was opposed to political parties even existing. I think history has proven him right.

    • Yokozuna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Also, the fact that the reasoning behind this is because they don’t want the justices to be pressured by partisian issues is ironic considering…

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve long held that if a “life sentence” in prison is 20 years, then 20 years should be the lifetime term of a SC justice.

      Limits on age and terms, as well as tests for competency and ethics, would also be great additions. It’s kind of amazing this isn’t already a thing.

  • maness300@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    Eh, civil disobedience is making a comeback.

    These fucks are going to learn real quick how the social contract is a two-way agreement.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      They’ll have to push REALLY, REALLY far before they actually motivate most people to resist.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Not like she can do anything either. If she steps down now, Biden replaces her, demographics of the court stay the same.

    All she can do is hang on until Thomas and Alito are replaced and hope that happens under a Democratic President

    That will flip the court from 6-3 conservative to 5-4 liberal, but then the problem is the next 3 oldest justices are Sotomayor, Roberts and Kagen.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      She’s a 69 year old type 1 diabetic…

      You know what the average lifespan for a type 1 diabetic woman is?

      68 years old…

      She should have stepped down immediately and let Biden replace her. Instead if Biden keeps fucking up, trump could very likely get another.

      • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        If she were more worried about the country than her own position she would have stepped down. And yes I know this throws shade on RBG. I’m still fucking angry she didn’t step down before it was too late. It’s not like she didn’t have plenty of warning. I judge the justices by their actions and it seems they don’t give enough of a shit. And now the rest of us pay the price.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          True.

          But stress is something that needs to be avoided to help increase lifespan with type 1 diabetes.

          And she’s not shy about how she’s doing

          https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/sotomayor-says-surprised-by-supreme-court-pace-tougher-workload

          Justice Sonia Sotomayor said she’s “tired” and “working harder than I ever had” due to the Supreme Court’s big cases, growing emergency calendar, and briefs from outside groups.

          “And to be almost 70 years old, this isn’t what I expected,” Sotomayor said Monday during an appearance at the University of California, Berkeley’s law school. “But it is still work that is all consuming and I understand the impact the court has on people and on the country, and sometimes the world. And so it is what keeps me going.”

          Just like RBG, she’s taking it personal and thinking only her can “fight the good fight”.

          She’s great and all, but we can find someone 30 years younger with a much lower risk of dying while Republicans have power.

          This is bigger than any one person.

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t think Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett are Boomers. (Kavanaugh IS within months though.)

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        We’re making them as fast as they are dying. The youth have been crippled by the greed of the old for generations.

  • rusticus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    I wonder if she thinks she should have worked harder at convincing RBG to retire sooner. You know, when Obama was president.

  • Chickens@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is rich coming from someone who consistently votes left of “constitutionalist”. She’s just angry she’s losing.