Two justices could hand Republicans 'Ginsburg moment'
The Independent
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.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
2 hours ago
- Gulf Today
Fearful of Trump's wrath, Congress abdicates its authority
Carl P. Leubsdorf, Tribune News Service The first six months of President Donald Trump's second administration have brought an unprecedented expansion of presidential power. They've also brought an unprecedented abdication of congressional authority. Fearful of incurring Trump's wrath — and perhaps primary opposition — Republican lawmakers have voted to confirm unqualified nominees, and rubber-stamped Medicaid cuts they acknowledged would hurt their constituents, often after proclaiming publicly they would never do so. Oversight committees, which are supposed to police the executive branch's management of legislation, are ignoring the administration's unconstitutional dismantling of statutory agencies and programmes — and complaining about the federal judges who are seeking to protect them. Some members who represent swing districts or states with thousands of Medicaid recipients may face the wrath of voters next year. All of them should. There's no question which member of Congress put on the year's most hypocritical legislative performance. Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri spent two months righteously condemning pending GOP proposals to cut Medicaid, noting it serves over one million Missourians. For Republicans 'to build our 'big, beautiful bill' around slashing health insurance for the working poor,' he wrote in The New York Times, 'is both morally wrong and politically suicidal.' He then voted for it, citing a modest addition funding rural hospitals. Then, he introduced a bill to repeal some of the Medicaid cuts, an empty gesture destined never to see the light of day — or the Senate calendar. Hawley was not the only GOP senator casting a damaging vote while expressing reservations. Sen. Lisa Murkowski gained some concessions for her Alaska constituents, then voted for the Trump package while expressing doubts about what she was doing. 'While we have worked to improve the present bill for Alaska,' she said, 'it is not good enough for the rest of our nation — and we all know it.' To be clear: the Senate would have rejected it had either Hawley or Murkowski voted on their stated principles. There was even less GOP resistance when the administration asked Congress to cancel $9 billion it had previously voted for, most for health and food aid to poor countries, the remainder for public radio and television. Though the cuts will shut small public radio outlets in many states, most Republican senators kept silent as Democrats denounced their impact. Only two, Maine's Susan Collins and Murkowski, opposed the measure, safe votes since the administration had enough support without them. The Senate's hypocrisy was matched in the House. Sixteen Republicans vowed resistance to the Medicaid cuts drafted by the House Budget Committee. 'Protecting Medicaid is essential for the vulnerable constituents we were elected to represent,' they wrote GOP leaders. 'Therefore, we cannot support a final bill that threatens access to coverage or jeopardizes the stability of our hospitals and providers.' Signatories were Reps. David Valadao and Young Kim, Ca.; Juan Ciscomani, Az.; Rob Bresnahan Jr., Pa.; Chuck Edwards, NC; Andrew Garbarino, Michael Lawler and Nicole Malliotakis, NY; Jen Kiggans and Robert Wittman, Va.; Jefferson Van Drew, NJ; Don Bacon, Ne; Dan Newhouse, WA.; Zach Nunn and Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Ia.; and Jeff Hurd, Co. But all 16 subsequently backed it after gaining an increase in the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction, which benefits mainly middle- and upper-income taxpayers. All 16 later acquiesced in even more sweeping Medicaid cuts added by the Senate. Legislative issues were not the only places where GOP senators abandoned stated principles amid administration pressure. Senators Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Joni Ernst of Iowa cast the decisive votes to confirm the two most manifestly unqualified Trump Cabinet secretaries after obtaining promises the two nominees abandoned once approved. Cassidy said Secretary of Health and Services-nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr., if confirmed, 'will maintain the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' recommendations without changes.' Soon after taking office, Kennedy removed all 17 panel members, replacing some with outspoken critics of government-mandated immunization for the nation's children. Ernst expressed concern about Secretary of Defense-nominee Pete Hegseth's stated opposition to women in combat roles and sought a commitment to having a senior-level military official dedicated to sexual assault response and prevention. 'Women will have access to ground-combat roles, given the standards remain high,' Hegseth testified. While he has not reversed the Obama administration's decision placing women in combat roles, he announced a review of physical fitness standards that could have that effect. Hegseth has not yet announced an official to monitor sexual assault issues, but he has continued his purge of high-level women officers, most recently removing the US Naval Academy's first female superintendent. Both Cassidy and Ernst face re-election races in 2026, and both feared Trump-endorsed primary challenges. In fact, some Trump supporters sought to pressure Ernst before she backed Hegseth — including a column by a potential primary foe, Iowa state Attorney General Brenda Bird. GOP-led congressional committees have been no better. The principal House investigative committee, which spent the last two years unsuccessfully trying to find a way to impeach Joe Biden, has switched its focus to whether the former president's declining health led aides to exercise his duties, despite the lack of evidence they did. Rather than probe the current administration's manifest irregularities, they're investigating hearsay about the prior one. One thing the past six months have shown is that, when casting votes or confirming nominees, there is little difference between so-called 'conservative' Republicans and so-called 'moderate' ones. When it comes to backing Trump, they are all on board.
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
How right-wing America is falling out of love with Israel
A recent report from CNN revealed that in just eight years, Democratic voters in the United States had reversed their views on Israel. In 2017, Democrats sympathised more with Israel over the Palestinians by 13 percent. In 2025, Democrats sympathised more with Palestinians by 43 percent. That is an unprecedented swing in so short a time. In many ways, this completed a trend that has been building for years, as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has openly embraced the Republican Party, leading the once solid, bipartisan support for Israel to split along party lines. Until now, Israel could always count on rock-solid support among Republicans and senior Democratic leaders, as proven by President Joe Biden's unstinting support for Israel's genocidal war in Gaza. That bet seemed even surer as President Donald Trump, with his fanatical Christian Zionist base, returned to office. But it turns out that support among Republicans is not so solid. In recent weeks, there has been increasing evidence that support for Israel among conservatives is fraying significantly. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Last month, a Quinnipiac poll found that 64 percent of Republicans sympathised more with Israel than with the Palestinians. That sounds like a lot - until you consider that just one year earlier, that number was 78 percent in the same poll. Sympathy for Palestinians did not increase: only 7 percent said they sympathised with Palestinians. So the drop was solely due to a declining view of Israel. The dynamic is not confined to polls by any means. Negative attitudes There has long been a sector of the American right wing that holds negative attitudes towards Israel. For the most part, that attitude has little to do with sympathy for Palestinians. Rather, it stems from either isolationism, antipathy towards Jews, or some combination of the two. Both of those tendencies have been magnified recently. Though the amendment to cut Israeli military aid received only six votes, the fact that it came from within Trump's camp was a shock The roiling, revived controversy over serial sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein's mysterious client list has rocked Trump and, for the first time in a decade, shaken support among parts of his MAGA base. The president who once seemed to be made of Teflon - immune to every controversy - is finally showing signs of vulnerability to a scandal he himself long tried to weaponise against Democrats. Similarly, some of Trump's most vocal and racist supporters have come out strongly against him on matters concerning the Middle East. Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News pundit who once called Iraqis "primitive monkeys" and promoted antisemitic theories that Jews were facilitating the entry of undocumented immigrants to undermine "white America" - known as the "Great Replacement Theory" - has become an increasingly vocal critic of Trump's policies. This reached new heights when Trump threatened, and then followed through with, bombing Iran. In a viral interview with far-right Senator Ted Cruz, Carlson ridiculed the senator for blindly backing the policy while knowing nothing about Iran. The criticism of Trump was blatant. Another long-time Trump supporter, Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia, has broken ranks with Trump on Israel. Greene, a known conspiracy theorist, Islamophobe, and antisemite, who once posited that space lasers operated by Jews started a catastrophic fire in California, recently brought an amendment to the Defence Appropriations Bill that, among other things, would have stripped half a billion dollars from Israel's annual funding for its Iron Dome missile system. Unsurprisingly, the amendment received only six votes in support. But that it came from within Trump's camp was a shock. The only other Republican to support it, Congressman Thomas Massie, is not in Trump's good graces. Greene's amendment did receive support from four progressive Democrats. Notably, it stirred anger at leading progressive Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who opposed the amendment, arguing that the Iron Dome - which gives Israel the ability to attack others without significant fear of retaliation - is a purely defensive weapon. Her progressive community clearly disagreed. Still, the fact that a proposal to cut military aid to Israel received bipartisan support and originated with Republicans was notable. Israel targeting churches Into this mess came a high-profile Israeli attack on the Holy Family Catholic Church in Gaza City. It was at least the sixth attack on a church in Gaza since 7 October 2023, but this one caught the attention of the US. Just days earlier, an attack by Israeli settlers on a church in the West Bank village of Taybeh also drew attention. The Church of al-Khader (St George), which dates back to the fifth century, was damaged when settlers attempted to burn it to the ground. Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war Israel has been evasive about the incident and has yet to arrest anyone in connection with the attack. It claims that the settlers were trying to put out the fire and that the arsonists are unknown. Few outside of the settlers' supporters put much faith in that account, given well-documented Israeli settler hostility to Palestinian Christians. US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee condemned the attacks on Palestinian churches - a remarkable shift for a man who has long defended Israel against virtually every allegation, no matter how well documented. Why do evangelical Protestants hate Palestinians? Read More » "It doesn't matter whether it's a mosque, a church, a synagogue," he told reporters. "It's unacceptable to commit an act of sacrilege by desecrating a place that is supposed to be a place of worship." Huckabee has never spoken out about the more than 960 mosques that Israel had damaged or destroyed in Gaza as of January 2025. But the attack on the Holy Family Church has resonated. Right-wing pundits have expressed outrage and frustration at Israel's attack on the church, with few believing Israel's claim that it was an artillery misfire. US Senator Lindsey Graham, another staunch supporter of Israel, expressed similar concern: "When you have Christian churches under siege in Gaza and the West Bank, it needs to stop," he told Jewish Insider. "You're not helping your cause by allowing people to abuse Christian holy sites," he added, warning that such actions could undermine Israel's ability to maintain support in the United States. "You're losing me," said influential conservative pundit Michael Knowles. "The Israeli government is really screwing up. This horrific war must come to a complete end." Epstein fallout Another issue that has exposed a growing rift within Trump's base is the resurfacing of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and the president's close personal friendship with the convicted sex offender. Epstein was finally jailed for his crimes in 2019 and was found dead in his cell, ostensibly by suicide, a little more than a month later. For a variety of reasons - some more substantial than others - many suspect Epstein was murdered. The connection between Epstein and Israel is now gaining traction in right-wing circles Given that he was trafficking underage girls for sex and is known to have handed those girls over to at least some very prominent global figures, the roots of the theory are obvious, even if some of the speculation remains wild and unsubstantiated. A purported list of clients that Epstein allegedly maintained is at the centre of the controversy, although it is not at all clear that the list exists. For years, Trump and others within his circle - such as the pro-Trump lawyer and pro-Israel zealot Alan Dershowitz - hinted that there were prominent Democratic figures on that list. Trump detractors, naturally, pointed to his long-time friendship with Epstein, along with various videos and photos of them together at Epstein's parties, as proof that Trump had something to hide. Adding fuel to the speculation is the fact that Epstein's accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, was the daughter of Robert Maxwell, who also died under mysterious circumstances and was widely believed - though never proven - to have been associated with the Israeli spy agency Mossad. (The media tycoon received a grand state funeral in Israel's Mount of Olives cemetery, attended by senior Israeli leaders.) The connection between Epstein and Israel is now gaining traction in right-wing circles. All of these factors are converging and revealing a deepening split on Israel from the right. A Pew Research poll in April found that 50 percent of Republicans aged 18 to 49 have a negative view of Israel - a 15 percent jump from 2022. Of course, Republican megadonors like Miriam Adelson and others will continue to pump as many dollars as they deem necessary to maintain solid support for Israel. But in the end, money in politics is only worth as much as the votes it can buy. Netanyahu made a bet years ago that if he were more brazenly brutal and radical in his oppression of Palestinians and aggression towards Israel's neighbours, solid support among Republicans - bolstered by the American pro-Israel lobby on both sides of Congress - would compensate for losing liberal Democratic voters. That looks like an increasingly poor bet today. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Filipino Times
2 days ago
- Filipino Times
Estrada seeks creation of Disaster Resilience Department, Disaster Food Bank system
Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada has filed two measures aimed at strengthening the country's disaster preparedness and response capabilities, including the creation of a Department of Disaster Resilience (DDR) and a disaster food bank. Under Senate Bill No. 791, Estrada proposes the establishment of the DDR as the primary government agency responsible for leading disaster risk reduction, response, and recovery efforts. The department would have a high level of authority to coordinate, monitor, and implement disaster-related programs across concerned agencies. The proposed department is envisioned to address current fragmentation in government responses to natural and biological hazards, including typhoons, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, pandemics, and other climate-related threats. 'Given how natural disasters can seriously affect our country's economic progress, it's important for the government to put in place long-term strategies and practical solutions to manage risks and help communities become less vulnerable,' Estrada said in a statement. Estrada also filed Senate Bill No. 2860, or the Disaster Food Bank and Stockpile Act, which seeks to establish a nationwide system of strategically located food and relief stockpiles. These stockpiles would be stored in calamity-proof, secure warehouses managed jointly by the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) and the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). The local warehouses would hold essential items such as non-perishable food, potable water, medical supplies, first-aid kits, tents, communication devices, and backup power sources. The bill mandates that these supplies have a minimum shelf life of two years and be sufficient to support local communities for at least three weeks. A first-in, first-out inventory system would also be required to prevent spoilage.
