Like many Americans, I respect Ruth Bader Ginsburg and am in awe of her accomplishments. She was a trailblazer for women and attended Harvard Law at a time when female law students were supposed to feel guilty that they’d taken the seat of a man.

A story from her younger years tells you a lot about Ginsburg’s grit and character: While they were both law students, Ginsburg’s husband, Marty, was diagnosed with testicular cancer. She attended both his and her own law school classes so her husband could keep up with his studies while undergoing treatment. Oh, and they also had a young daughter at the time.

She eventually rose to the highest level of American jurisprudence and worked tirelessly at her job until her body gave out last week.

I respect Ginsburg’s brilliant mind and her long service to the Supreme Court.

When she died Friday, however, the seat she occupied - it was not “her” seat, by the way - became vacant and the Constitution says the president nominates someone to fill the vacancy with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate.

It’s simple. Then again, nothing is simple these days.

No sooner had the news broken than we all knew what was coming: Those on the left, who’d insisted that the seat occupied by Justice Antonin Scalia be filled immediately during an election year, would reverse course. And those on the right, who’d insisted in 2016 that the next president and not President Obama should fill the empty seat, would also do a 180.

That’s politics, folks. Yes, there is hypocrisy on both sides. Anyone who’s surprised hasn’t been paying attention.

If Hillary Clinton were president and Chuck Schumer had a Democratic majority in the Senate, we all know they would ram an appointment through in record time, election year or not. But the Senate and White House belong to the GOP for now, and they want to fill the vacancy.

It appears they have the votes.

Over the weekend we learned of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s “last wish.” The justice’s granddaughter said that on her death bed, her grandmother gave her a message for America:

My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.

I have seen this statement reprinted with quotation marks. We have no way of knowing exactly what the dying woman said. What we have is the word of an anguished relative that, in her final moments, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was consumed with politics.

At the risk of sounding heartless, even if that statement is accurate, so what? If Trump’s re-elected, there won’t be a new president until 2025. Surely Justice Ginsburg didn’t want that seat vacant for years.

Yet, in a Twitter storm on Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez indignantly scolded Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for being “in violation of her dying wish” with his plan to hold a vote on the president’s nominee.

How, exactly, do you violate a wish?

Supreme Court justices are appointed for life. When they die or retire, a replacement is chosen. These are not hereditary positions. Ginsburg knew that. 

In fact, Justice Ginsburg expressed a much different sentiment in 2016 when the Republican Senate refused to vote on President Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia.

Here’s what Ginsburg said then, according to USA Today:

 "The president is elected for four years not three years, so the power he has in year three continues into year four... Maybe members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be.”

Looks like they woke up.