AP Photo/Charles Dharapak

“On days like today, it matters who is sitting on the Supreme Court. It matters that we have a President who appoints fair and impartial judges to our courts, and it matters that we have a Senate who approves them. “We’re in this fight because we believe that we don’t run this country for corporations — we run it for people.” To those who might object to the appointment of Warren on the grounds that she lacks judicial experience or that Senate Republicans would fight like dogs to block confirmation, I offer two simple rejoinders: The first is that judicial experience has never been a bar to Supreme Court confirmation. Over 36 percent of justices seated on the court since the country’s founding had no prior judicial tenure, including Chief Justices John Marshall, Earl Warren and William Rehnquist. Those without prior judgeships also include the legendary populist reformer and author Louis Brandeis, with whom Warren has been compared, as well as Obama’s most recent appointee, Elena Kagan, who was selected to succeed Justice John Paul Stevens. In 2010, before Kagan’s nomination, Warren was rumored to be on the short list of names Obama considered to replace Stevens. Although Warren hasn’t been mentioned in the judicial conversation since then, it’s clear that Democratic insiders realize she has the talent and fortitude for the job. The second rejoinder is even simpler and applies not only to Obama but to the next Democratic president, whomever that may be: When it comes to the Supreme Court, liberals and progressives can’t afford to be timid in the face of Republican opposition. No matter how much we dress up the language of legal discourse with constitutional jargon and abstractions, the Supreme Court remains a political institution in which justices with different ideological predispositions battle for dominance. The right wing learned this simple truth decades ago when it set out to alter the composition of the federal courts and reshape the direction of constitutional law with the creation of think tanks and clearinghouses like the Federalist Society. Undeterred by liberal objections, the right rallied behind the nominations of Thomas, Roberts and Alito. There is no good reason the left can’t do the same for a progressive stalwart like Warren. She shouldn’t just be added back to the short list of potential replacements for Ginsburg or anyone else who retires; her name belongs at the top. Your support is crucial...

As we navigate an uncertain 2025, with a new administration questioning press freedoms, the risks are clear: our ability to report freely is under threat.

Your tax-deductible donation enables us to dig deeper, delivering fearless investigative reporting and analysis that exposes the reality beneath the headlines — without compromise.

Now is the time to take action. Stand with our courageous journalists. Donate today to protect a free press, uphold democracy and uncover the stories that need to be told.

SUPPORT TRUTHDIG
In this Article:
#bailout#congress#conservatives#election#elizabeth warren#hillary clinton#law#republicans#ruth bader ginsburg#scotus#senate#supreme court#tarp#td-original