Thurgood Marshall does not retire during Bush admin

Had he been a little more healthy and stayed on this would have meant that Bill Clinton would have appointed another Justice. Who would it have been?

Could the Bush vs Gore decision have ruled a general right to vote?
 
Had he been a little more healthy and stayed on this would have meant that Bill Clinton would have appointed another Justice. Who would it have been?

Could the Bush vs Gore decision have ruled a general right to vote?

Maybe, unless butterflies mean he dies earlier than January 24, 1993. Marshall staying on means no Clarence Thomas appointment and Clinton appoints another Justice. Bush v Gore is decided the other way, but I don't think the decision would have the sweeping scale the OP is describing. At the least, Gore is probably elected if the Florida state recount is allowed to continue.
 
There is a constitutional amendment setting a retirement age.
He had been out of it for years before he resigned. Was signing off on opinions written by clerks.
And, no Bush v Gore is settled the same way. OTL, the basic question of equal direction was decided 7-2. The 5-4 was the remedy.
 
. . . Gore is probably elected if the Florida state recount is allowed to continue.
I’m not at all sure.

All we were looking at were the dimpled chads (which I think clearly shows the intention of the voter) and even that was, for some reason, controversial.

We were not addressing Florida Sec. of State Katherine Harris purging the rolls. We were not addressing the butterfly ballot in which Buchanan got a significantly higher percentage of votes than he did in other parts of Florida.

So, we essentially have a dead heat in which Bush is ever so slightly leading. We do a recount and Bush may still win.

* Or, the low-income areas had less staffing to do stuff, including removing the chads from previous ballots which were then blocking clean punches.

So, if we count dimpled chads—as well we should—maybe Gore does win (low-income areas tending to have a higher percentage of Democratic voters).
 
Last edited:
Every 5-4 conservative decision since Thomas's confirmation would be reversed. Morse v. Frederick, Citizens United, and Janus v. AFSCME come to mind.
 
Every 5-4 conservative decision since Thomas's confirmation would be reversed. Morse v. Frederick, Citizens United, and Janus v. AFSCME come to mind.
Thank you.

I think the Citizens United decision, in particular, endangers the future of the Republic. I hate to seem so melodramatic about it, but it is a move toward plutocracy and away from democracy.
 
Marshall did damn well to reach 1991. The man had heart attacks as far back as the seventies, and considering his lifestyle, making it past eighty was excellent longevity on the bench. You need to handwave quite a bit to keep him going; some deep personal POD, perhaps, like he gives up his two pack a day habit much earlier.

Soz thread, but no, I don't think this guarantees a clearly different SCOTUS. The product of Marshall retiring under Clinton means a vacancy from either White or Blackmun transpiring in 1995; when Bubba Bill was at his most 1994 mid terms contrite-triangulatory, and Congressional Republicans were at their most emboldened.

A fascinating alternate scenario, and one which most likely results in a justice somewhere in the O'Connor mould ballpark, a swing vote. If you want a reliably liberal SCOTUS this late, then you really need a two term 1989-1997 Dem President - which is a big ask.
 
Last edited:
Top