Ruth Bader Ginsburg fumbles

Ruth Bader GinsburgSupreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was way out of line in her scathing criticism of Donald Trump. Three times in the last week, she let it be known she can’t imagine this country under a president Trump, She called him “a faker,” said he “has no consistency about him,” and added that he says whatever comes into his mind.  Which was exactly what she was doing.

It doesn’t matter than she wasn’t wrong on content. But she was dead wrong speaking publicly that way.  As she acknowledged this morning, it is wholly inappropriate for a Supreme Court Justice to weigh in on politics or a political candidate. Other justices have occasionally let their political views be known, but never this egregiously.  She was right to apologize, but it’s a little like trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

Will she have to recuse herself if the outcome of the Clinton v. Trump election went the route of Bush v. Gore? Would she have to recuse herself if Tom Brady appeals to the Supreme Court  for a stay in his  four-game suspension because she’s the single justice now handling appeals from the Second Circuit? And if she did recuse herself, would she also have to recuse herself from other deliberations on his case?  After all, he has made clear that Donald Trump is a good  friend of his?

Ginsburg deserves credit for owning up to the error.  Supreme Court Justices rarely, if ever, apologize for anything. Still, her regrettable remarks reinforce the sense that campaign 2016 is a race to the bottom and that the disease of name calling has infected the body politic far and wide.

I welcome your comments in the section below. To be alerted when a new blog is posted, click on “Follow’ in the lower right portion of your screen.


3 thoughts on “Ruth Bader Ginsburg fumbles

  1. gailspector1

    I thought the same thing at first, Margie. But then I thought: If Donald Trump is as dangerous as many people fear, maybe people with platforms have a responsibility to speak up. I kind of wish she’d done so with stronger words. She was absolutely out of line but I’m not sure that what’s appropriate matters right now.


  2. Judy Holmberg

    Hey Margie, Scalia had been far more outspoken about social issues ( try abortion, women) that he might be dealing with. She was wrong, it seemed odd, she apologized. If the Supreme Court of the United States actually ends up dealing with a case of a supposed deflated football, we certainly do have some serious values issues in this country and Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s husband may have made a good prediction about moving to New Zealand. I think what this really shows is the need for term limits, even on the Spreme Court.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s