I have long been a critic of Supreme Court justices embracing the era of what I have called “the celebrity justice.” Justices are increasingly appearing before highly ideological groups and inappropriately discussing thinly veiled political subjects or even pending issues. She previously called President Trump as “faker.” Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been a notable recidivist in this type of conduct and does not appear to be deterred by criticism that she is undermining the integrity of the Court. She is back at it with a new interview with the BBC.
Ginsburg, who has been openly critical of President Trump, says the US is “not experiencing the best of times” but assured viewed that the “pendulum” will swing back. She also weighed in on the fight between the media and Trump: “I read the Washington Post and the New York Times every day, and I think that the reporters are trying to tell the public the way things are.”
I happen to agree that the attacks on the media are unwarranted and unwise, though not as unprecedented as some have suggested. I am far more concerned over Ginsburg’s seeming inability to revisit the public spotlight and injudicious statements as I am a politician like Trump attacked the media. Ginsburg seems drawn to the adoring crowds or coverage that comes from being the most recognized liberal justice on the Court. It is a highly inappropriate role to play as she appears to maintain her “base” of supporters.
Ginsburg again criticized Congress, saying “Our legislature – which is the first branch of government – is right now not working.” She also cheered the recent Women’s March, which had a distinctly anti-Trump message: “I’ve never seen such a demonstration – both the numbers and the rapport of the people in that crowd. There was no violence, it was orderly. So yes, we are not experiencing the best times but there is there is reason to hope that that we will see a better day.” That seems pretty political in my view.
I was equally critical of Justice Antonin Scalia for his similar proclivities. This is also a sad statement about Chief Justice John Roberts. Just as I criticized Roberts for failing to take Associate Justice Samuel Alito to task for his highly inappropriate conduct in a prior State of the Union, I believe that it is Roberts’ role to take a stand against these public appearances of justices where they hold forth on contemporary controversies or criticize Congress or a president.
While liberals denounce other justices as being ideological on the right, they seem to relish the role of Ginsburg is being openly partisan in some of her comments. What is particularly sad is that Ginsburg has had a distinguished tenure on the bench with profound opinions that will stand the test of time. Yet, she is undermining her own legacy with these public appearances and commentary.
118 thoughts on “Ginsburg Again Publicly Discusses Political Issues With Renewed Criticism Of Congress, Praise for Protesters, and Hope For “Better Times””
I believe Ginsburg had planned to retire during a H.Clinton presidency so she could mark the historic moment by having the first woman president nominate the successor to her. She probably believes Trump ruined that grand gesture for her. He didn’t. The American people did and rightly so. I now wonder whether a lifetime appointment is truly necessary.
Lay off, Turley. She did fine.
Something of Good Queen Bess about her.
Media and the so called justices have been exposed how fake they are !
And Chelsea waiting in the wings…
I you’re right Autumn. I’d love to see unenrolled voters rise up and give it to the reds and blues on Election Day.
Well, first we have to unite behind non establishment candidates – red, blue and indies! I think that’s what terrified the corporatocracy – the support Bernie garnered from people’s donations and volunteers who phone banked and went door to door.
There’s always hope, right? Or maybe not – apparently Obama is getting ready to re emerge on the polical scene per “too big to fail, too important to jail” Eric Holder:
I watched the BBC interview. She was not biased or overtly political or out of bounds.
We need more justices over 80.
The old coot Ginsburg is on another bender. She couldn’t even find the venue.
I understand why Ginsburg is not going to Trump’s address.
Dubya Luvs the MSM – too funny. CNN, NBC, ABC, MSNBC — all the same….
The House of Bush are all hurting since Trump ripped Fredo..err, Jeb, a new butthole.
The Fredo character in that family is Neil, and he’s never run for office.
I happened to be already eating lunch when some flipped on the TV and as luck would have it NOT it was CNN. But it turned out to be a huge laugh in. First one reporter would comment on what President Trump said about a subject tjem the reporter would sum it up, inaccurately. Then another reporter would ask some unimporant nobody from the left who would say well whe will have to agree to a compromise and incude this that and so on repeating what Trump had just said was in the new program. Clinton News Network Mr. Gutman was far far too gentlemanly. Comrade Clintons Political Propaganda Program would be far closer to accurate.
Make as note. Since the Clinton News Network hasn’t changed in twenty years the next time some idiot has itt urned on toss a beer bottle and call it a freedom from free speech protest as the boob toob shatters.
Either that or barf all over the bar and send the owner a cleaning bill.
Anon – what’s your point? No secret Jimmy is a Bernieorbuster. However, in his shows after the DNC destroyed Bernie, he stressed continuously that Trump.was an unknown evil whereas HRC was a known evil. Dems flnd it irritating that people would not fall in line to vote for HRC. We voted for Stein, stayed home and yes, some voted for Trump.
And now the DNC by selecting Perez has finished any hope for the Dems excepting a very candidates (all of whom the Establishment Dems despise.)
I thought you were a Milo Breitbart Progressive. 😉
Funny!! Anon =) As an Indie I entertain many POVs. Unfortunately Milo destroyed himself with his vitriol.
If the left continues to implode as they have for the last few elections, the Dems will control only the major US cities, all but a few being sewers of depravity, and California. I am center/right and I do not want to see Republicans having a monopoly. I lived in Chicago, I have seen the horrors of a political monopoly up close and personal. The Dems need to have a purge. They need to execute the old, elitists, and make way for some of their young talent. A swift execution of Bubba and Lady Macbeth ala Mussolini and Petacci would be the logical start of the purge.
Broadcast it on C-Span.
What young talent? Rahm Emanuel? Keith Ellison?
Tulsi Gabbard, Tim Canova
I just hope we have patience. This is an incredible job. I’m anxious to hear tonight’s speech. I hear Dems who show up won’t stand up or applaud. Great way to respect the office! But, I do hope four years will get us somewhere. Ginsburg is an Agenda Justice. She espouses no positives about our Constitution, unless it’s a good one for her agenda.
Nick, we certainly live in interesting times politically! The big divide was Republican vs Democrat – Coke or Pepsi some would say. But now, thanks to the primary shenanigans the Indies have increased and 40 million people have left the Democratic party (this explains why the Dems want their hands on Bernie’s email donor list). The anger we feel is arguably more intense than the Republicans harbor towards the Dems. Indies are not going to support the status quo.
Many Independents came from the GOP, including myself. Time will tell where the GOP will be in 2018 but they are on the clock to see if they will get any of us back.
LOL! Scahill wouldn’t even debate Milo. He’s a stupid, hypocrite, coward. Perfect liberal trifecta.
Too principled to be on stage with that fraudster.
Agree Scahill was scared to debate Milo although I do think he is otherwise a very fine journalist. Even Jordan Peterson thinks Milo would be a formidable opponent
I am fascinated whenever any of the Justices speak in public. I cannot recall a situation where a Justice who spoke in public came off anything less than witty, charming,erudite and sharp as a whip. That being said, The intensely partisan presentations which have occurred in the recent era detract from the majesty of the Court, and foment in the minds of the laypeople a belief that the Court is little more than another legislature inhabited by “us” and “them.” As much as I enjoy hearing from any Justice, the reputation of the Court going forward would be better served by less political musings in public on the part of the sitting Justices. However, I don’t think Chief Justice Roberts has any leverage in this matter; lifetime appointment being what it is.
Sounds like granny found the sauce again!
Karen, I think I love you.
Anyone who supports Justice Ginsberg for being openly partisan must also support the partisanship of a conservative judge. Fair is fair.
If you think maybe your position would be untenable if the other side too it, then maybe you need to rethink your position.
This statement by her hardly compares to the openly partisan political ones by Scalia and the wife of his silent ditto, Thomas.
Comments are closed.