It sounds like Ed Kilgore over at New York Magazine’s Intelligencer website has a sad about all of the conservative judges being appointed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Maybe he’s nervous because Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was recently admitted to the hospital again, but somehow he’s come to the conclusion that Democrats have never politicized judicial appointments, and they need to start.

Kilgore writes:

Do Democrats care as much about the judiciary? Some do, particularly women, LGBTQ folks, and members of groups in danger of losing their voting rights. But Democrats did not “weaponize” judicial appointments in 2016 anywhere near the extent Republicans have, and while Trump and McConnell have won test after test of their resolve, Democrats lost theirs by failing to find a way to force the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland for the last 11 months of the Obama presidency.

As Republicans cheered the progress of their child-judge [Justin] Walker to the DC Circuit, Democrats were praying for the health of 87-year-old Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who participated by phone in oral arguments from a hospital bed where she was recovering from a flare-up of a chronic gallbladder ailment. It was a grim reflection of each party’s long-term positioning in the effort to shape the judiciary and, through it, constitutional law. Democrats better step up their messaging on these matters between now and November.

So he’s admitting that Ginsburg is an activist judge and Democrats need more like her? Better win in November then.

Yep.

The party that made “Bork” a verb is complaining about weaponizing judicial appointments?

Related: