eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Justice Ginsburg Slams Trump, Draws Fire From…Liberals?
http://unfilteredpatriot.com/justice-ginsburg-slams-trump-draws-fire-from-liberals/

Other than the late Antonin Scalia, no Supreme Court Justice has been more eager to comment on American politics than Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But when Ginsburg took shots at Republican nominee Donald Trump this week, many critics – mostly liberals and anti-Trump conservatives – said she crossed a line.

“I can’t imagine what this place would be – I can’t imagine what the country would be – with Donald Trump as our president,” Ginsburg said in an interview with the New York Times. “For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be…I don’t even want to contemplate that.”

To leave no doubt about where she stood, she recalled what her late husband used to say when disagreeing with political developments: “Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand.”

In a separate interview with the Associated Press, Ginsburg slyly alluded to her electoral predictions.

“It’s likely that the next president – whoever she will be – will have a few [Supreme Court] appointments to make,” she said....

In a Chicago Tribune editorial, the paper – fiercely anti-Trump from the beginning – accused Ginsburg of tarnishing the court.

“For justices to descend into partisan election campaigns would undermine public faith in their willingness to assess each case strictly on its legal merits,” they wrote. “It would also encourage justices to let their political biases affect, if not determine, their decisions.”

Uh-huh. See what’s going on yet?

We should welcome Ginsburg’s comments. They chip away at a very dangerous myth – that Supreme Court justices are apolitical, unbiased arbiters of truth. We should not encourage the American people to have “faith” in an idea that is completely fictional. Ginsburg’s political beliefs don’t change based on whether or not she blabs about them to the New York Times. Isn’t it better to know than to pretend that these justices are using “strictly legal merits” to govern their rulings? Who, at this point in time, can still believe that anyway?....

S. Maturin

That twisted witch should have been committed years back. That she represents Bill Clinton's idea of the ideal woman should not have influenced congress back when she was appointed by The Fornicator in Chief.

PeterS

I like that Ryan was slamming her for saying pretty much what he, himself, said! He said it showed bias in her. Did his bashing Trump show bias in him? Does he think he's the only one who's allowed to show a wit of sanity? What a hypocrite...

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Maybe Ryan and Ginsberg are covert bed partners?
Think about it:-(

Mom8052 Loc: Lost in the mountains of New Mexico

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If she does bring that to the table when determining the outcome to any case, then why have a Supreme Court, let the lower courts determine the outcome of the cases. Political Bias doesn't have a place on the Highest Court in our Country!

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Given her statutre she had no right making such a comment and yes, eagle, it does show how "politics" plays within the SCOTUS who is to be independent in thought of an party when ruling on Constitutional Law/..

She did make a mockery of the highest court and did bring in that already known fact that they are anything but impartial or independent in thought..She should retire now~~

As for Ryan, his 15 minutes of fame is all he is looking for..

Took the position "temporarily" didn't he say?? Well he's run his course and his "temporary" needs to come to an end not when Trump goes in, if he goes in...

That man is a snake through and through..Not just because of all his trumped up attacks on Trump but because he is no Republican sitting there, he's a scam artist!!!

Kevyn

Her comments were not political in nature, she spoke of the patent incompetence and unsuitability of Trump as potential president. Her learned statement was made out of deep patriotism and love of country, and we're entirely appropriate. Patriotic Americans should heed her advice.

PeterS

Damn Linda, you have no mercy for those who dare think for themselves do you. The man was simply being honest, as was Ginsburg--she's just assumed Scalia's rhetorical position--is there something wrong with that?

PeterS

That, or she was just showing how easy it is to get under his skin. Ginsburg does nothing she's hasn't thought about. Her words are no accident...

S. Maturin

PHEW!

That has a fouls odor about it.

PeterS

So why are you guys always trying to appoint conservative justices? If we didn't want bias we wouldn't appoint the justices we appoint...

PeterS

Honesty generally does....

PeterS

Bed partners, I doubt it. Not everyone's fallen in love with Donald. Sad that we are no longer allowed to think and say what we believe...

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Not at all Peter..She is entitled to her opinion and position politically, she is just not entitled to speak it publicly because of the position of supposed indifference/independence to "party desires" as a sitting SC Justice....She mocked her very office..That is what I am commenting..

May surprise you to know that I have read a number of her dissension pieces on certain rulings and found her to be very logical, and worthy of great knowledge...Still does not dismiss her unethical and callous remark, whether it be Trump or anyone else for that fact...Neutral means neutral....

Leave it to the oath taken~~

U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part I › Chapter 21 › § 453
28 U.S. Code § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges

Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

Now, how is she to uphold her oath with such feelings??? and what did she do but slap the face of Justice in her crude remark!!

S. Maturin

Her comments were not political in nature, she spoke of the patent incompetence and unsuitability of Trump as potential president.

1) You are lacking any idea whatsoever as to the role of a judge, especially a JUSTICE of the SC.

2) Scalia may have appeared to someone as politically warped as yourself to be acting "politically-motivated", but he was simply doing the reasonable thing: Applying the topic(s) to the blueprint which made this great, special, unique nation what it is.

You know, this reminds me of something Harry Truman said: Once as Harry was headed to address congress, a reporter yelled out, "GIVE 'EM HELL HARRY!"

Harry Truman replied, "I do not give them hell-- I tell them the TRUTH, they just think it's hell."