U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should a sitting Supreme Court justice comment on a presidential candidate or nominee?
Yes 25 23.81%
No 80 76.19%
Voters: 105. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-12-2016, 11:21 AM
 
4,022 posts, read 1,854,071 times
Reputation: 3950

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
There is an unfortunate and disastrous precedent, though it was much stronger than any comment recently made.

"Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."
-Justice John Paul Stevens [Dissent] Bush v. Gore (2000)

"...The Supreme Court decision that decided the 2000 Presidential Election should go down in history as one of the court's most ill-conceived judgments..."

A Supremely Bad Decision: The Majority Ruling in Bush v. Gore :: writing@swarthmore :: Swarthmore College

Scalia Rewrites History, Claims 5-4 Bush v. Gore Decision 'Wasn

This was a bad decision, however, it begs the question:

What does this have to do with the thread topic?

Is your position, they made a bad ruling 16 years ago, so now sitting Justices should have free run to do whatever they want?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2016, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
9,876 posts, read 6,624,363 times
Reputation: 6279
Oh come off it.

Judges are politicians in robes. Get real.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 02:03 PM
 
4,709 posts, read 3,508,285 times
Reputation: 4416
Ruth Bader GinAndTonicsburg is at it yet again.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg back on the warpath as she calls Donald Trump a 'faker' | Daily Mail Online

She told CNN that Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton has received tougher media treatment than Trump's, saying: 'I think he has gotten so much free publicity.

C'mon, Roofie, what does 'free publicity' have to do with 'tougher media treatment'? Is she serious about Hillary actually receiving any tough media treatment?

Even members of the legal community think she's finally lost it:


'I find it baffling actually that she says these things,' said Arthur Hellman, a University of Pittsburgh law professor, in an interview with The Washington Post. 'She must know that she shouldn't be. However tempted she might be, she shouldn't be doing it.'

Josh Blackman, a professor at the Houston College of Law who specializes in constitutional law and the Supreme Court, said Ginsburg 'has lost it' and her comments are 'absolutely beyond the pale - even for her outrageous self'.

'The other justices should hold an intervention, and tell her to be quiet or step down,' he wrote on his blog . 'This isn't funny anymore. She is making overtly political statements about the presidential election that are absolutely unbecoming of a Justice of the Supreme Court.'


One thing is sure -- this woman is either battling dementia or alcoholism. Get help, Ruth, because you are embarrassing yourself and the Supreme Court. I used to think Nancy Pelosi was ba*sh*t crazy........until Ginsburg got her gin on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 07:59 PM
 
Location: NY in body, Mayberry in spirit.
2,692 posts, read 1,772,174 times
Reputation: 6324
Ginsberg should shut her wrinkled, radical lib pie hole.

That's the most thoughtful response she deserves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 08:07 PM
 
Location: Amongst the AZ Cactus
7,074 posts, read 4,929,055 times
Reputation: 7701
I think she should resign. Her conduct is against the code of conduct for US judges:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...517_story.html

Quote:
There’s a good reason the Code of Conduct for United States Judges flatly states that a “judge should not . . . publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office.” Politicization, real or perceived, undermines public faith in the impartiality of the courts.
But who pays attention to the rules/rules of law anymore? Rules/laws are for little people after all. Ask Hil. No consequences for the connected/those in power. It's a big yawn to many in our disengaged/uneducated populace. When things like this happen and go unpunished(which I'm sure it will) and polls shows a vast majority of people would still vote for someone even if they were indicted, we got a big problem in our nation/political system/the populace.

Last edited by stevek64; 07-12-2016 at 08:16 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Florida
21,673 posts, read 11,135,668 times
Reputation: 7893
With the Obama presidency, we see corruption-- blatant corruption and no consequences. This is how far this country has fallen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2016, 05:27 AM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,792,844 times
Reputation: 7242
The answer to the OP's question is obviously NO, but really this just confirms what we already knew; The Supreme Court is losing it's legitimacy in that it is becoming politicized. Not so much a search for truth anymore, but rather a competition to see which side can win the argument, Conservative or Liberal, regardless of and at the expense of the truth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2016, 05:30 AM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,792,844 times
Reputation: 7242
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
I don't know. Aren't SCOTUS Justices there to provide their opinions...?
NO.... They are there to interpret laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1 View Post
Of laws, not politicians or really any individual.
Even that assessment is wrong. They aren't there to inject their opinions in to the law, they are there to interpret it in spite of their opinions or political leanings...


Justice Scalia nailed it when he said that " a judge who always likes his decisions probably isn't a very good judge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2016, 05:32 AM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,792,844 times
Reputation: 7242
Ginsberg is probably doing this to rile the Liberal base. It's imperative to her for Clinton to win, as it is her ( Ginsberg's ) legacy at stake, as she knows she probably doesn't have it in her to hold out for another 4 years if Trump wins.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2016, 05:34 AM
 
Location: Long Island
33,065 posts, read 13,956,497 times
Reputation: 7047
She shouldn't be injecting her opinions into politics but then Trump brings out the best in people.
She just lowered herself to his standards, best to keep quiet if you are on the Supreme Court and remain out of the fray.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:02 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top