logo
Why two justices could hand Republicans their own ‘Ginsburg moment' next year

Why two justices could hand Republicans their own ‘Ginsburg moment' next year

Independent7 days ago
Are conservatives headed for their own 'Ginsburg moment'?
That could be the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections if Democrats have any say in the matter.
With next year's congressional elections still on the horizon, the first glimpses of the political dynamics that will shape 2026 are coming into view. Even as Donald Trump and his administration remain this week consumed by an uproar among the MAGA base over the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, issues like inflation and the White House's mass deportation raids continue to retain salience quietly in the background — quietly, but not with diminished importance, as they'll likely remain the top factors driving Americans to the polls.
Then, there's the Supreme Court. It remains a sore point for liberals who watched Republicans lock Barack Obama out of the discussion over a vacant seat in 2016 and then, in 2020, watched Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death just two months before a presidential election notch a second rightward shift for the court in less than a decade.
Justice Clarence Thomas, 77, is the oldest member of the bench. Some conservatives have privately begun to fret that the right-leaning justice or his 75-year-old colleague, Samuel Alito (whose wife hung a symbol honoring the January 6 conspiracy after the attack) could cause another 'Ginsburg moment' by refusing to resign while Republicans control the Senate, allowing one or both seats to fall into liberal hands.
Legal commentators are somewhat torn over whether either will retire this term. Mike Davis, a former Senate GOP staffer on Supreme Court nominations and current 'viceroy' of Trumpworld, wrote that Alito was 'gleefully packing up his chambers' after the 2024 election.
Ed Whelan, the Antonin Scalia chair in constitutional studies at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, also predicted in 2025 that Alito would retire in 2025, and Thomas in 2026, according to the American Bar Association Journal (ABAJournal).
Others are less certain, and a source close to Alito tried to tamp down on that speculation earlier this year.
"Despite what some people may think, this is a man who has never thought about this job from a political perspective," they told the Wall Street Journal.
"The idea that he's going to retire for political considerations is not consistent with who he is," the source added.
David Lat, who founded his own blog reporting on gossip surrounding the Court and broader legal world, also noted to ABAJournal that both justices have hired full rosters of clerks for the upcoming two terms, the latter of which will end in 2027.
Under Donald Trump's first term, three Supreme Court vacancies were filled by conservative justices. Ginsberg's refusal to retire at multiple points when multiple factors were clear, including how her health challenges were affecting her work and the likelihood that Republicans would bend the rules (or shatter them) to see her seat filled with a conservative, is still looked by many as a failure of not just the justice but those liberals around her who allowed the octogenarian's desire to stay on the job conflict with political realities.
Her defenders insisted that the justice's deliberations about retiring did not factor in politics at all. Critics of the Court see the justices' shroud of apoliticism as an excuse that does not match their rhetoric or actions, either on the bench or in public.
The efforts by Alito's allies to dissuade speculation echoed those same defenses and rang especially hollow for the conservative justice who has shmoozed with a conservative billionaire with cases before the court and who reportedly authored his own blueprint for the eventual overturn of Roe vs Wade as far back as 1985.
Thomas, meanwhile, reportedly sparked fears among conservatives that he would resign from the Court on his own way back in 2000 as he complained about the job's pay. But there's been no such murmuring as of late.
If the claims are true and both justices are set on remaining on the bench, they could put Republicans in an awkward spot.
The GOP's chances of protecting their newly-acquired Senate majority remain strong but have grown noticeably weaker in the past six months. The announced retirement of Thom Tillis in North Carolina puts his purple-seat state decidedly in play. Maine's Susan Collins is up for re-election, as is John Cornyn in Texas; Cornyn faces a hyper-MAGA primary challenger whom the senator has said could give up the seat to Democrats in November of 2026 if his primary challenge is successful.
Rumors also continue to swirl about the possible retirement of Joni Ernst, the senator from Iowa, and her partner in the Senate delegation from the state, Chuck Grassley, is a staggering 91 years old himself.
Several factors could force the Senate back into Democratic hands next year, and if the party's discussions over countering GOP redistricting in Texas by 'going nuclear' and following suit across a range of blue states is any indication, the party's members have learned not to give Republicans an inch and could block any of Trump's SCOTUS nominations going forward.
In the end, the same shaky apoliticism that the justices cling to when facing any criticism from Congress or the Executive Branch could swing back to help the left, after causing so much damage at the end of the Obama era. It would be up to Democrats in the Senate to decide whether they are truly willing to take a page from the GOP's playbook.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Starmer must take a strong line with Trump to relieve the suffering in Gaza
Starmer must take a strong line with Trump to relieve the suffering in Gaza

The Independent

time26 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Starmer must take a strong line with Trump to relieve the suffering in Gaza

The phrase 'walking a diplomatic tightrope' is overused by the media, but it is an accurate description of Sir Keir Starmer's task when he meets Donald Trump on Monday for talks at the US president's Turnberry golf course in Scotland. According to Downing Street sources, the prime minister will discuss what more can be done to secure a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, to 'bring an end to the unspeakable suffering and starvation in Gaza', and to hasten the release of the remaining Israeli hostages. Sir Keir is under growing pressure from Labour backbenchers, and several members of his cabinet, to go further by joining France's Emmanuel Macron in formally recognising Palestinian statehood. But if the prime minister did so, it would weaken his hand with Mr Trump, the only foreign leader with meaningful influence over Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. So Gaza poses a big test for Sir Keir's quietly effective strategy of not challenging or criticising the US president in public. We have to take it on trust that he will argue strongly behind closed doors for the US to restart the peace talks it led in Qatar before it pulled out, blaming Hamas for the lack of progress. Indeed, President Trump should revive plans for a 60-day ceasefire, the release of some hostages, and – crucially – an increase in aid supplies, which are desperately needed to prevent more deaths from starvation. Such an approach by Sir Keir will not be enough for the 221 MPs, including a third of Labour backbenchers, who have signed a letter calling for the immediate recognition of Palestine. Or, indeed, for much of the British public. It is not surprising, given the harrowing pictures of emaciated children in TV news bulletins, that opinion in the UK is turning against Israel, which rightly enjoyed the goodwill of many after the horrific 7 October attacks. According to More in Common, 29 per cent of people now sympathise more with the Palestinians – up by 11 percentage points since November 2023 – while 27 per cent sympathise with neither side, 16 per cent with both sides equally, and 15 per cent with Israel. Some 48 per cent believe Israel's response to the conflict has been disproportionate, and only 28 per cent think it proportionate. Amid mounting outrage, Israel has announced a limited 'tactical pause' in its military operation in three areas of Gaza to allow in more humanitarian relief. The easing of restrictions is welcome, if long overdue, but it must be more than a cynical temporary move. It is no substitute for a ceasefire leading to negotiations on a long-term peace settlement. Nor will the airdrops planned by the UK and Jordan be more than a sticking plaster; they are ineffective compared with relief delivered by lorries, and sometimes even dangerous. Sir Keir's reluctance to recognise Palestine may prove to have been a holding line. If countries such as Germany, Canada and Australia change their minds and back France, he may shift. The SNP plans to force a vote on the issue when the Commons returns from its summer recess in September, which would expose Labour divisions. That month, the Labour conference will be problematic for its leader if he doesn't change tack, while the UN general assembly will discuss France's move. Yet for now, The Independent believes the prime minister is right to maximise his influence with President Trump, and to keep the recognition of Palestine as a card to play in talks on a permanent peace that must include a two-state solution to the Israel-Hamas conflict. Recognising Palestine now would not in itself change the terrible conditions on the ground in Gaza, as Bob Geldof, the Live Aid organiser, told Sky News on Sunday. He said it should have been done 'ages ago', but that the demands of Labour MPs amount to a distraction that 'is not going to make any material difference'. Sir Keir's quiet diplomacy is a better response to the crisis in Gaza than the tone-deafness of Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader. Interviewed on Sky, she backed calls for a ceasefire but said: 'What I see when I see Israel is a country that's trying to defend itself.' She declared that the pictures of starving children had not affected her support for Israel, insisting that it is allowing in relief supplies – a view that is hotly disputed by the United Nations and aid agencies. So far, Sir Keir has confounded critics who warned that he would not be able to have it both ways and maintain good relations with the US and the EU. He has secured trade deals with both. The emergency in Gaza now poses a big test for the prime minister's strong record on foreign affairs in the past year, which regrettably has not been matched on the domestic front. Sir Keir's understandable desire to hug Mr Trump close should not lead him to pull his punches over the gruesome tragedy unfolding in Gaza.

Jay Leno blasts late-night comedy hosts over divisive content as Colbert gets the boot from CBS
Jay Leno blasts late-night comedy hosts over divisive content as Colbert gets the boot from CBS

Daily Mail​

time27 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Jay Leno blasts late-night comedy hosts over divisive content as Colbert gets the boot from CBS

Jay Leno is taking aim at modern late-night comedy shows, claiming the hosts are isolating half their viewers in an interview released just days after Stephen Colbert got the boot from CBS. The former Tonight Show host, 75, reflected on the shift in late-night culture during a sit-down interview with Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation president David Trulio. The candid conversation was taped two weeks ago but was recently shared and quickly circulated online. They spoke openly about comedy, politics and what's changed in the late-night world. Trulio began by mentioning to Leno that his jokes had a reputation of being equally balanced in his time on air. 'I read that there was an analysis done of your work on 'The Tonight Show' for the 22 years and that your jokes were roughly equally balanced between going after Republicans and taking aim at Democrats. Did you have a strategy?' Trulio asked. 'I got hate letters saying, 'You and your Republican friends,' and another saying, 'I hope you and your Democratic buddies are happy' - over the same joke,' Leno said. 'That's how you get a whole audience. Now you have to be content with half the audience, because you have to give your opinion.' 'Rodney Dangerfield and I were friends,' Continued Leno. 'I knew Rodney 40 years and I have no idea if he was a Democrat or Republican. We never discussed politics, we just discussed jokes.' 'I like to think that people come to a comedy show to get away from the pressures of life. I love political humor - don't get me wrong. But people wind up cozying too much to one side or the other.' 'Funny is funny,' Leno said. 'It's funny when someone who's not….when you make fun of their side and they laugh at it, you know, that's kind of what I do.' 'I just find getting out - I don't think anybody wants to hear a lecture,' he continued. 'When I was with Rodney, it was always in the economy of words - get to the joke as quickly as possible.' He criticized comedians who inject their political opinions into every monologue and said he preferred making the whole audience laugh rather than pushing an agenda. 'I don't think anybody wants to hear a lecture … Why shoot for just half an audience? Why not try to get the whole? I like to bring people into the big picture,' he said. 'I don't understand why you would alienate one particular group, you know, or just don't do it at all. I'm not saying you have to throw your support or whatever, but just do what's funny.' His comments come in the wake of Colbert's dramatic departure from The Late Show. A media frenzy engulfed The Late Show after Colbert publicly slammed the CBS show's parent corporation, Paramount Global, for settling a defamation lawsuit with Trump for $16 million, calling it a 'big, fat, bribe,' in his opening monologue. Just days after the searing call-out, Colbert told his studio audience that the network was ending The Late Show in May 2026. Speculation has loomed over why the show was canceled, with A-listers and fellow talk-show hosts coming to the comedian's defense. Colbert won an Emmy for his work on The Colbert Report, a satirical show that ran on Comedy Central from 2005 to 2014. After he replaced David Letterman on The Late Show, the program was nominated for the most Outstanding Talk Series at the Emmys from 2017 to 2022. Meanwhile, other late-night legends have rallied behind Colbert in the wake of his show's cancellation. Jimmy Fallon said: 'I don't like it. I don't like what's going on one bit. These are crazy times,' Fallon said, referencing how 'everybody [was] talking about' the decision. 'And many people are now threatening to boycott the network', he said, setting up another punchline. 'Yeah - CBS could lose millions of viewers, plus tens of hundreds watching on Paramount+.' David Letterman also backed his successor and suggested CBS canceled The Late Show because he was 'always shooting his mouth off' about Donald Trump. The 78-year-old late-night legend created The Late Show in 1993 after NBC denied him the chance to succeed Johnny Carson on The Tonight Show. In his first comment on the show's cancellation, Letterman noted that his show was more about political satire than his version of The Late Show but was still complimentary, calling the decision by CBS 'pure cowardice.' 'I think one day, if not today, the people at CBS who have manipulated and handled this, they're going to be embarrassed, because this is gutless,' he told former Late Show producers Barbara Gaines and Mary Barclay.

China, US to extend tariff pause at Sweden talks by another 90 days, SCMP reports
China, US to extend tariff pause at Sweden talks by another 90 days, SCMP reports

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

China, US to extend tariff pause at Sweden talks by another 90 days, SCMP reports

July 27 (Reuters) - Beijing and Washington are expected to extend their tariff truce by another three months at trade talks in Stockholm beginning on Monday, the South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on Sunday, citing people familiar with the matter. During the expected 90-day extension, the U.S. and China will agree not to introduce new tariffs or take other actions that could further escalate the trade war, the report said. While the earlier discussions in Geneva and London focused on "de-escalation", the latest meeting the Chinese delegation will also press Trump's trade team on fentanyl-related tariffs, the report further said, citing three sources familiar with the matter. Reuters could not immediately verify the report. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The third round of U.S.-China talks is set to be held in Stockholm on Monday to tackle longstanding economic disputes at the centre of the countries' trade war.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store