Justice Sotomayor Says She is Traumatized By Supreme Court Losses

a reply to: Xtrozero


Why has this Man Not been Committed to an Insane Asylum by Now ?



www.youtube.com...

a reply to: FlyersFan

She needs to take a number and get in line for the therapist.

I'm traumatized every time she as a SCOTUS member opens her mouth.

Pretty sure I'm not alone on that.

Poor her she's got ptsd from words lol

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: theatreboy

Keith Obermeyer tweeted out today that the Supreme Court should be dissolved.

And to think I used to like that dude when he was just doing sports. He’s turned into an unhinged COnVID carrying bat-dung lunatic. Or am I confused with Olbermann ? Either way… My remarks stand.

Lots of folks coming out and calling for Sotomayor to retire.

Opinion Piece - Sotomayor Must Retire

New York Magazine - Sotomayor Should Retire

Reason Magazine - Sotomayor Should Retire

NewsNation - Is It Time for Sotomayor to Retire

Fox - Sotomayor SHould Consider Whether it's Time to Step Down

VOX - Sotomayor and Kegan Should Step Down

Washington Post - The Sotomayor and Kegan Retirement Question

etc etc etc .... tons more articles ... all relatively new.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I want her to retire when we've got a Republican POTUS.

Cheers

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: FlyersFan

Good to know we have such a grounded human being sitting on the highest court in the country. /S

3.12.2024 fyi

Justice Sotomayor is being pressured to retire before Donald Trump becomes President.

Source: www.joshbarro.com...

a reply to: Xtrozero

She is not a constitutionalist, just a progressive.

She's not an Originalist, she's a Living Constitutionalist.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Xtrozero

She is not a constitutionalist, just a progressive.

She's not an Originalist, she's a Living Constitutionalist.

She a breathing progressive. Some of her court opinions are actually unconstitutional and totally freakish. ❎

a reply to: xuenchen

Some of her court opinions are actually unconstitutional and totally freakish. ❎

I guess that's a category you have more expertise in than I.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Like she wasn't already traumatized get real!

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

She's not an Originalist, she's a Living Constitutionalist.

That there is the problem. The Constitution wasn't designed to be a living document that is changed as the wind blows. The problem with progressives is they can only see the little magic world they want to create and there are many worlds out there that you and I would not want to see happen, but they don't see them. It's a very immature attitude...

originally posted by: Astrocometus

Like she wasn't already traumatized get real!

Do we all have different definitions of the word traumatize?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Do we all have different definitions of the word traumatize?

I'm sure you would agree there are different types of trauma?

I think the life of a Judge might ar times inflict some type of trauma.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Xtrozero

She is not a constitutionalist, just a progressive.

She's not an Originalist, she's a Living Constitutionalist.

The Constitution is factually not a living document. If it was meant to be interpreted differently over time, the Founders wouldn't have bothered including a mechanism to change it.

As a judge (or justice in this case), you either interpret the law as written, or you're not doing your job.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

She's not an Originalist, she's a Living Constitutionalist.

That there is the problem. The Constitution wasn't designed to be a living document that is changed as the wind blows. The problem with progressives is they can only see the little magic world they want to create and there are many worlds out there that you and I would not want to see happen, but they don't see them. It's a very immature attitude...

Correct.

It's incorrect to say we have 6 conservative and 3 liberal justices.

We have 6 justices and 3 activists.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

She's not an Originalist, she's a Living Constitutionalist.

That there is the problem. The Constitution wasn't designed to be a living document that is changed as the wind blows. The problem with progressives is they can only see the little magic world they want to create and there are many worlds out there that you and I would not want to see happen, but they don't see them. It's a very immature attitude...

You're absolutely welcome to that opinion. I'm just glad we've intensified the actual conflict within the court itself correctly. Some justices are Originalists, and some are Living Constitutionalist in how they view the Constitution and its meaning in today's society.

The Constitution is like the Bible. Christians all agree it's "right", but not everybody agrees with how to interpret it.

Never Mind

originally posted by: Astrocometus

I think the life of a Judge might ar times inflict some type of trauma.

I don’t, what people call trauma is just life, and those that suggest trauma tend to live the easiest trauma free life of all. They have no clue to real trauma…

a reply to: Sookiechacha

not everybody agrees with how to interpret it

Your DEI activist justices aren’t trying to interpret anything.
They want to change it to fit their sick agendas.
It’s laughable how any of them can be traumatized except Kavanaugh who arguably has a legit reason.