Democrats and Democrat-supporting individuals have responded to the news of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death by pouring in support for the causes that she spent her life fighting for. As The New York Times reports, in the 9 P.M. hour after Ginsburg’s death was publicly revealed, ActBlue (a hub for online donations to Democrats) handled more donations in a single hour than at any other point since the site first went live 16 years ago. In the 10 P.M. hour on Friday night, the site’s record was again broken — after hitting $6.2 million in the 9 o’clock hour, Democrats hit $6.3 million in the 10 o’clock hour. That second hour total works out to about $100,000 a minute.
Following Ginsburg’s death, the donation ticker on ActBlue, a nonprofit organization that enables left-leaning nonprofits, Democrats, and progressive groups to raise money online, began increasing rapidly—with about $100,000 in donations each minute. https://t.co/ulh7QnV4gc
— FORTUNE (@FortuneMagazine) September 19, 2020
The huge levels of fundraising, which are spread across Democratic campaigns around the country, suggest that Democratic voters are energized about the possibility of keeping Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his most craven political allies from rushing to fill Ginsburg’s seat while the presidential election is underway. Just a short while after Ginsburg died, McConnell announced that President Donald Trump’s presumed nominee to replace her would get a vote on the floor of the Senate, despite Senate Republicans themselves refusing to hold a vote on then-President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace the late Antonin Scalia in 2016.
If @LindseyGrahamSC is a man of his word, I don't see how votes on a SCOTUS nominee until after the election:
"If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump's term…we'll wait to the next election"
He said, "Hold the tape" and @CSPAN did.https://t.co/JuXA6jbtAN
— jonkarl (@jonkarl) September 19, 2020
McConnell claims that the “principle” is that Supreme Court seats shouldn’t be filled in election years when the White House and Senate are filled by different parties — he made this “principle” up out of thin air, however. There is not and has never been anything “on the books” confirming the idea as somehow immutably legitimate, although it ever-so-conveniently paves the way for a third Trump justice, since the White House and Senate are currently controlled by the same party.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (3/10/16): "I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination." pic.twitter.com/4aMCyGjv5c
— CSPAN (@cspan) September 19, 2020
Around the time of the original fight over then-President Obama’s pick to replace Scalia, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — who has since become the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would be one of the first stops for a presidential Supreme Court nomination — insisted that the Senate should hold off on a confirmation in 2020 even if the president was a Republican. Well, we’re here, the president is a Republican, and there’s a Supreme Court vacancy — will Graham stay true to his word? Or will he again prove himself to be a craven political opportunist? (UPDATE: Graham has announced his support for moving forward with a Ginsburg replacement. In other words, his word isn’t worth much.)
This is what Senator Lindsey Graham, the current Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said back in 2018. Let's see if he has an ounce of integrity left and will keep his word. https://t.co/VKk6M6jScA
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 19, 2020
