Don’t replace RBG until after the election

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg should not be replaced until we have a new president

A+headshot+of+Ginsburg+during+her+time+as+a+Supreme+Court+Justice.

Photo The New Yorker

A headshot of Ginsburg during her time as a Supreme Court Justice.

Olivia Godinez, Opinion Editor

The untimely death of American Justice icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a shock to all, but it doesn’t have to be a step in the wrong direction.

Justice Ginsburg was a stepping stone for women’s rights during her thirteen-year reign on the Supreme Court, working on the court’s most controversial case Roe V. Wade (passed 1973) saying, “If you impose restraints that impede her choice, you are disadvantaging her because of her sex.”

Of course, the natural thing to do in the case of a Justice’s death is to replace her. However, considering the circumstances of our time, RBG’s spot on the supreme court should not be replaced until after the inauguration of the next president of the United States of America.

The biggest reasoning behind this comes from Majority leader Mitch Mcconnell himself when he voted not to replace Justice Antonin Scalia after he passed before the 2016 election. “The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice,” he said in a statement. “Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

This logic should be applied in the case of Justice Ruther Bader Ginsburg as well. It is unfair for McConnell to vote for the replacement of RBG before the inauguration of our next president when he clearly was not for this in the case of the 2016 election. This argument is primarily for consistency and fairness – if President Obama was denied the opportunity to appoint a new justice during his term, President Trump should also be denied this opportunity.

The sovereignty of the American people still stands – we have a right to decide who we are governed by, and who makes our laws. To replace Justice Ginsburg now, at a time that many have already voted, would be grand hypocrisy.