Let the Obama Supreme Court rumors begin (Sotomayor is selected)......
 

I heard on the radio that Ruth Bader Ginsberg has announce that she has pancreatic cancer.

Wait, have multiple media sources confirmed this?

CNN is talking about it

I saw this too. Unfortunately for her the prognosis doesn't look good at all.

I don't think his replacement will be as liberal as most think. They'll certainly be pro-choice but I think they'll be more moderate in their other views.

SCOTUS Press Release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE	For Further Information Contact:
February 5, 2009	Kathy Arberg 202-479-3050

U. S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had surgery for an apparently early-stage pancreatic cancer today, at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City. According to Dr. Murray Brennan, the attending surgeon, Justice Ginsburg will likely remain in the hospital approximately 7-10 days.

Justice Ginsburg had no symptoms prior to the incidental discovery of the lesion during a routine annual check-up in late January at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. A Computerized Axial Tomography (CAT) Scan revealed a small tumor, approximately 1 cm across, in the center of the pancreas.

Justice Ginsburg is 75 years old. She was appointed to the Court in 1993 by President Clinton.

Pancreatic cancer really sucks :(. Hope its not too painful for Justice Ginsberg.

For someone like myself who is admittedly ignorant about politics and the judicial system...it seems like whenever the Supreme Court is brought up, it's in reference to abortion. What are the other issues that are up for debate/could be swung by Presidential appointment outside of pro-life/pro-choice which tends to side with party lines?

Appreciate it, and if my question isn't clear I can hopefully rephrase.

Obama has indicated that he does not think that the courts are the place to move social policy, so I could easily see him appointing a moderate liberal.

That said, he was a liberal con law professor, so he might very well have some dark horses in mind that won't be on anyone's short list and who might be pretty far to the left.

If he has to replace someone quickly, he won't really have a deep bench on the courts of appeal--at least not if he is looking for someone young. The last 8 years of appointments have been, of course, Bush's, so very few, if any, of them would be (pardon the pun) appealing.

Finally, his pick for SG has never argued in front of the Supreme Court before, so he is not adverse to picking qualified people outside of the box. One may want to look at various governors or senators with the requsite legal minds if one is thinking outside of the box.

Free speech issues, privacy issues, and even gun issues can come up for debate.

Take porn for instance. The government could charge a couple who makes sex videos with obscenity. Now a liberal judge would site with the couple and say it's free speech. A conservative judge would site with the government and say that the constitution says nothing about having a right to make sex videos.

In terms of very high profile things, I could see various war on terror issues being affected. Everything from can W and co. get immunity for any prosecutions for war crimes (though I think that Obama has no interest in going after them) to what kinds of rights (if any) should be afforded to suspects in terror prosecutions.

I also, personally, think that the death penalty is not going anywhere, but it would not shock me a ton if a left turn by the Court abolished it.

In terms of lower profile stuff, federal sentencing law is in a state of pretty extreme flux right now--though the conservative wing of the court is taking the more "defendant friendly" position on those issues, so it may not break down quite as easily into liberal/conservative as the abortion discussion. See, e.g., United States v. Booker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Other issues that seem close right now include federalism issues (i.e. states rights), the Constitutionality of the various aggressive methods being employed against sex offenders (civil commitment, residency restrictions, etc.), and qualified immunity issues (i.e. how hard or easy should it be to sue the police when they violate your civil rights).

Also, some of these things don't become apparent until the Court has the votes in place. In the mid-90s, the Court went on a mini-State's Rights run, but did not really give much hint of that until it happened.

what if it's a HS teacher and a student and the video is made on a cell phone cam and uploaded to Facebook? What.

Is the student underage?

Is the teacher hot?

yes and yes

I would expect someone fairly liberal if it's a replacement for Ginsburg. There's sort of an unwritten code that Dems replace libs with libs and conservatives with moderates and Reps replace conservatives with conservatives and liberals with moderates.

Pancreatic Cancer is so fatal because it is usually asymptomatic until it is much too late to beat. If her cancer was truly caught on a routine annual CT scan (gotta love that level of health insurance) and is truly in the early stages, her chances should be relatively good for survival.

Federalism would be interesting. Think there's a chance that any window opened by Morrison/Lopez would be completely slammed shut by the addition of Obama appointees?

Not sure about Obama's leaning on this issue one way or another.

And now we know why Obama went with Hillary on the SoS job, in order to avoid having to deal with her wanting an SC nomination.

+1

I hate cancer so much.

what are you like...a real doctor?? :confused:


:lol:

Oddly enough, I knew that too. It's the same sort of thing with another sort of cancer that I've had to become familiar with because of work (thankfully not because of any more personal experiences).

Does this mean I could play EF on TV? Or only that I can stay at a Holiday Inn Express under his name?

lol - go with the holiday inn express!

i was just messing around...i suppose it's not that uncommon-knowledge or anything, but I just felt like cracking a lil joke to make myself laugh.

Nobody puts EF in the corner.

Pancreatic cancer is what my mom had. For Justice Ginsberg's sake, I really hope they were able to catch it early.

lil too much dirty-dancing? or was it too many episodes of "The Pickup Artist" and watching the black-haired kid use that as his pickup line again and again.

Don't fuck with EF27. He's a psych doc. He can send you PMs all night, and by the morning, you will have swallowed your tounge like Miggs in Silence of the Lambs.

i miss my shrink. he pretty much abandoned me. asshat.

Last I saw him was like...a couple years ago. Right before he left on a trip to Israel. He was like "Okay I'm going to Israel. When I get back we'll setup another appointment - and keep in mind at this point I was on meds (I believe)."

Lo and behold, never heard from the guy again. Not a peep.

It sounds like you have abandonment issues. Why don't you lie down on this couch over here and tell me all about it... ;)

SI

Why can't it be both?

lol i HAD severe anger management issues - mostly licked now thank god, and i have issues with letting people get close to me ("intimacy issues" - although in the physical sense).

I believe at one point it was "mild clinical depression."

In fact, what I should do, just for giggles, is go home and find the complete nueropsych-profile that I had done on me and post it. It's pretty amusing.

Stay tuned for another episode in "As the Torgo Turns..."

That would be patient abandonment which is unethical and actionable in some states. Entertaining turn of direction for this thread (besides these last few posts.) Anyway, regardless of politics, I hope for the best for Justice Ginsberg.

Out of curiosity, what's the right move there? A referral?

oh yeah? Ball could have also been in my court to call him and schedule an appointment and I never did...my memory is a bit hazy. wasn't anything serious as far as medication goes, just 40mg prozac, and i was quite the yo-yo with that anyways, as far as going on and then off (although I know that diluted the effectiveness of it)

In any case though, it was fine by me, because by the end I wasn't receiving any active psychotherapy out of it, it was more just someone to talk to. I'd go in for a half-hour a month and he'd ask me a bunch of questions to make sure I wasn't having side-effects and then we'd talk about what was going on in my life and maybe i'd blow off a little steam, or we'd end up talking about him. It wasn't really providing me with any theraputic-benefits.

good to know though. maybe i should sue and get my payday. my right as an american, right? lol - kidding.

oh no. he was just going on vacation. he had a covering-doctor.

Since he didn't come back, a referral (preferably 3 different ones and let the patient choose) is the responsible ethical choice.

Edit: Even if "the ball was in your court", the psychiatrist has a responsibility to call the patient and attempt to schedule an appointment before they just abandon them.

nahhh - i think he came back. Sure seems like he did. He's still workin at the hospital. LOL.

Anyways like I said, I'm not busted-up over it. I feel relatively mentally-healthy so it's all good.

I love the FOFC thread swerves. :D

A family friend of my wife's had pancreatic cancer. This was her second cancer (breat cancer first), and it had (whatever the medical word is) spread through her body including into her stomache and liver. She was in the 5% or less survival rate. That was 5 years ago. She's still alive, active, and cancer free. Somebody has to be in that 5% I guess. She's relatively young (late 30's), so that might help explain it a bit. She's still at a very high risk of having it comeback and be fatal (probably a really really high risk), but this has given her a few more years to be with her family.

Looks like Sonya Sotomayor is the selection..........

Obama to Announce Supreme Court Nominee Tuesday Morning - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com

I think that's off-topic for this thread, to be honest.




:D

It is and it isn't. Sotomayor is the replacement nominee for Souter, but if she wins confirmation, I think you can expect Ginsburg to step down fairly soon. Ginsburg sounded very anxious to have this appointment be a woman, I think to protect against the possibility of an all-male court in the event of her incapacitation.

omg liberal activist judge!!!!111!!

YOU'RE OFF TOPIC!!!

Sorry, that's all I've got. :D

I don't know much about this candidate outside of the fact that she's female and hispanic, so she fits a couple of 'minority' profiles.

Wasn't she the one who ended the last baseball strike?

I thought she ruled in favor of Owl Gore inventing the internets.

Predictable pick. Gives the court a woman and hispanic which it definitely needs. I'm not a fan of forced diversity, but the court is one area where we should have representation from all factions. It's still sad that we will only have 1 female on the court when Ginsberg resigns (considering they make up 50% of the population).

She seems like a moderate liberal which goes in line with what's on the court now from that side of the aisle. I'm assuming that there are probably some liberals out there who are upset that she is not more liberal. The court really hasn't had a hardcore liberal since Marshall. The right side of the court is very conservative.

I think opponents will throw a few stones her way but she'll be confirmed with ease (barring she pays her taxes). Wouldn't be a strong political move to go after a female hispanic. Two voting blocks the Republicans are hurting with. Not to mention the fact that Obama could have gone much more liberal.

And now we get several weeks of "up or down vote" clips.... :D