Ginsburg will sit out of court arguments

[Blimey]

Bottom line.....

RBG is trying to save her legacy that she single handedly eF'd up royally.

While Barry Obozo was still president she had the opportunity, and was encouraged to step down to allow Barry to appoint her successor.
Her pride and arrogance surfaced and got the best of her.
Her lifelong quest for women's rights and equality (a great legacy IMO) guided her to keep her seat because she was so confident that hildabeast would be the first female president and she wanted the beast to appoint her successor.

Epic, I repeat EPIC FAILURE!

I know little of her, but I've heard that a lot. If it's true, I imagine she was enamored with the idea of having her replacement appointed by the first female president. Oh, what history and pomp! And then oh fuck Trump got in. Now I need to hang on another four years (minimum).

She still may pull it off. She may hang on through end of next summer in her seat, he loses the election, and it's too late to replace her. Or she may be forced into retirement, and in just four years he ends up replacing four justices, which would be pretty damn epic.

 

[CaseHardened]

I certainly think there is nothing abnormal about missing these in general; people are sick or whatever. What makes this unique is that it's the first time she's done it ever in 25 years and it's immediately on the heels of a major surgery that, IMO, was hidden.

She may recover and get back to work and if I had to bet money I'd say she will, but who really knows. The truth is that she had pretty major surgery, and going through that particularly at her age has high odds of post-surgery problems.

You're getting my hopes up.

 

[MadScientist]

I swear this bitch is taxidermied at this point and had her blood replaced with formaldehyde. Barely hanging on by a thread.

 

[holdover]

Its all over but the crying

 

[Marine Cpl]

She misses a few days and some here are saying impeachment.

This has happened before where 8 justices hear the case. She can chose not to vote or read the court transcript.

She might be completely wrong but she should be respected . She doesn’t hide what she is .

I hope she steps down and then lives many years.

And is replaced by a pro-2A

Jesus man. Every post from you is defending corruption. Justices aren't supposed to be what they are. They are supposed to be impartial.

Would you think it okay if for example I was a racist Criminal Court Judge and gave minorities soft sentences and gave white people harsh sentences because that's who I am?

Or how about if I was an Anti-American Supreme Court Judge nominated by some President who always ruled against American Sovereignty because I didn't like what America stood for and wanted change.

 

[GOPerfect]

There has to be a process to remove a judge incapable of serving. I know there’s be a shitstorm but FFS she needs to retire and spend what little time she has left with family.

4


So if she had a bad case of the flu, should she be forced to retire?

 

[Calculon]

She clearly has bigger problems than the flu.

 

[Marine Cpl]

4


So if she had a bad case of the flu, should she be forced to retire?

I see your point. But then again, if you can't do your job....

Where I work, if I'm out of work for too long or have a certain type of illness, they let me go. If I fracture something that takes more than a year to heal, I'm out.

She clearly can't do her job because of age and illness. She can't even stay awake for more than an hour at a State of the Union Address. How can she possibly be able to read cases?

Her interns are ruling in her stead.

 

[Truebeliever]

Jesus man. Every post from you is defending corruption. Justices aren't supposed to be what they are. They are supposed to be impartial.

Would you think it okay if for example I was a racist Criminal Court Judge and gave minorities soft sentences and gave white people harsh sentences because that's who I am?

Or how about if I was an Anti-American Supreme Court Judge nominated by some President who always ruled against American Sovereignty because I didn't like what America stood for and wanted change.

Does she interpret the constitution as she sees it? That is not corruption.

Go look at the different schools of thought on it. From Scalia textualist to the “living” constitution which would be her take.

You keep calling people who disagree with you corrupt isn’t right.

And what the meaning of words and laws had different meanings at the time written.

And non legal example. The movie “The Gay Divoicee” isn’t what it would mean today.

A living constitutionalist would add things like marriage privacy, the right to privacy etc.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Does she interpret the constitution as she sees it? That is not corruption.

Go look at the different schools of thought on it. From Scalia textualist to the “living” constitution which would be her take.

You keep calling people who disagree with you corrupt isn’t right.

And what the meaning of words and laws had different meanings at the time written.

And non legal example. The movie “The Gay Divoicee” isn’t what it would mean today.

A living constitutionalist would add things like marriage privacy, the right to privacy etc.

Oh. Boy. I don't want to get into this again. Read the founder's quotes themselves like I told you a hundred times already if you want to know their intent. There are available for everyone including Supreme Court justices.

 

[masterswimmer]

Oh. Boy. I don't want to get into this again. Read the founder's quotes themselves like I told you a hundred times already if you want to know their intent. There are available for everyone including Supreme Court justices.

Please explain why the founders established the Supreme Court in the first place. If the answers are already written in the Constitution and BOR's then there would be no reason for SCOTUS. Apparently the Founding Fathers understood there could, and would be varying interpretations of the Rights as written.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Please explain why the founders established the Supreme Court in the first place. If the answers are already written in the Constitution and BOR's then there would be no reason for SCOTUS. Apparently the Founding Fathers understood there could, and would be varying interpretations of the Rights as written.

They are there to interpret the Constitution as written. They are there to prevent lawmakers from keeping unconstitutional laws after passing them. They are there as part of a check and balance system to keep the President and Congress from passing or committing Unconstitutional Acts.

That's what they are there for. Not to change it based on their feelings or the growing times.

The founders gave the system a way to do that. It's amending the Constitution and it's a hard process to do for a reason.

 

[masterswimmer]

They are there to interpret the Constitution as written.

Therein lies the problem. Once a document needs to be interpreted it is open to varying opinions of the interpretation. Otherwise all we would have to do is read the document/Constitution, not interpret it.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Therein lies the problem. Once a document needs to be interpreted it is open to varying opinions of the interpretation. Otherwise all we would have to do is read the document/Constitution, not interpret it.

It doesn't need to be interpreted. It's written in plain English. It goes like this.

New York passes a law saying that you can't put up a Christmas tree in plain view on your property. It later passes a law that you can't wear religious artifacts in schools.

It goes to the Supreme Court and they find it Unconstitutional based on what is written in the 1st Amendment. They read the law, read the Amendment that they should have memorized and either find the law Constitutional or not.

The Constitution is written in plain English. We all know it is.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" means exactly that.

The practice of Supreme Court Justices playing with words or commas to get their desired result isn't what is supposed to happen.

The only Amendment they do this to is the Second.

 

[Celt]

She misses a few days and some here are saying impeachment.

This has happened before where 8 justices hear the case. She can chose not to vote or read the court transcript.

She might be completely wrong but she should be respected . She doesn’t hide what she is .

I hope she steps down and then lives many years.

And is replaced by a pro-2A

I don't think she deserves any respect. Clearly she thinks her opinion takes priority over the Constitution

 

[Robin]

I don't think she deserves any respect. Clearly she thinks her opinion takes priority over the Constitution

And she has openly expressed just that, publicly, and publicly while on foreign soil.
Robin

 

[Blimey]

I didn't know that she said that. This snopes article does its best to paint this quote as wrong, under the umbrella of some nonsense about jefferson, but what she said is within context and repeated within the same statement. Plainly, if she were writing a constitution today, it wouldn't be the US constitution. And that's a reasonable view to have--just not for a SCOTUS justice. Because implicit in that statement is the belief that the constitution is lacking and therefore it is safe to conclude somebody in her position would legislate from the bench, which of course is what she tries to do.

FACT CHECK: What Did Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Thomas Jefferson Say About the Constitution?

I wonder how many days she can sit out before the media begins asking real questions about her health.

 

[pjzwtl]

4


So if she had a bad case of the flu, should she be forced to retire?

She clearly has bigger problems than the flu.

She clearly has bigger problems than the flu.

She probably wouldn’t survive the flu at this point

 

[nortatoga]

They are there to interpret the Constitution as written. They are there to prevent lawmakers from keeping unconstitutional laws after passing them. They are there as part of a check and balance system to keep the President and Congress from passing or committing Unconstitutional Acts.

That's what they are there for. Not to change it based on their feelings or the growing times.

The founders gave the system a way to do that. It's amending the Constitution and it's a hard process to do for a reason.

Interesting that you would say this! Not to change it based on their feelings or the growing times.

 

[holdover]

I read rumors that she will be retiring at the end of Jan. Probably for heath reasons. She isn't doing well.

 

[VietnamEraVet]

From my experience with my dad at the end of his life, this is my take on her situation: I doubt that the cancer found in her lungs was as minor as they make it out. It strikes me that when they send you home with no further treatment, that they are basically telling you that there is nothing more they can do for you. In other words, - the end is coming, and soon.

I'll bet she is busy working out her funeral arrangements in the mold of John McStain, - big pomp and circumstance, blah, blah, blah, - how she singlehandedly tried to save America from the despicable clutches of Donald Trump...

I can't wait for her to be gone.

 

[holdover]

 

[holdover]

 

[Steal2B]

"Ginsburg is not reporting to work in support of the TSA "sick out" to protest the goverment shutdown. "

 

[holdover]

Is that what they told you?

 

[holdover]

I heard she was getting a manicure

 

[Blimey]

From my experience with my dad at the end of his life, this is my take on her situation: I doubt that the cancer found in her lungs was as minor as they make it out. It strikes me that when they send you home with no further treatment, that they are basically telling you that there is nothing more they can do for you.

At this point it's fair to say she's lying about her health. Now, she may very well be going for a run tomorrow and put another 10 years into the court. But:

December 15, 2018:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she's 'almost repaired' after last month's fall - CNNPolitics

No comments whatsoever in this about the fact she has lung cancer and surgery.

Six days later, a lobe is removed from a lung, and IIRC she had not forwarned this to anybody whatsoever.

December 21, 2018:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...aa5c2fcc9e4_story.html?utm_term=.8e4ab1546412

If somebody was asking me about my healthy and I knew that in six days I was getting part of my lung removed for lung cancer, to not mention that and instead focus on some bones healing after a fall is certainly lying by omission. Moreover--and I cannot find the quote precisely--googling "ginsburg health december" right now provides articles about her health being "fine", so the new portrayed mid last month is that she was up and at 'em. She even her self talked about getting back to work with her trainer. This may be venturing into Baghdad Bob territory.

As for being released, I imagine if the surgery went well she would have been released to go home as we've seen and heard. If instead the prognosis was terminal, possibly the same thing would happen.

We just don't know; her and her handlers have now proven themselves as unreliable as far as her health is concerned.

 

[masterswimmer]

Memorial Sloan Kettering is an interesting cancer treatment facility. They are touted to be one of, if not the best cancer treatment center in the country. IMO the facts and numbers are manipulated.

Our family story.....

Back in 1996 my BIL was diagnosed with a brain tumor. A glioblastoma to be precise. Let me preface the rest of the story with, money was not any concern whatsoever. So that would not be a reason for denial of treatment.

Evaluations and testing were conducted at MSKCC. After all was said and done they denied him treatment. The prognosis was dire. Apparently they decline treatment to more people than they accept so that the numbers they report for successful cancer treatment remains high. My BIL did pass on five years later.

As for RBG receiving treatment and suddenly stopping treatment, I believe they only accepted her for surgery on her lung because of who she is. Any other person would have been denied treatment due to a very grim prognosis.

I don't think there's a great deal of hope for her recovery. I personally do hope she recovers, retires and enjoys some long overdue rest and relaxation with her loved ones.

 

[nortatoga]

Remember Chief Justice William Rehnquist he to refused to retire.

Death and Legacy
On October 26, 2004, Rehnquist announced that he had been diagnosed with thyroid cancer. He administered the oath of office to President George W. Bush at his second inauguration in January 2005, but the illness was apparently taking its toll on the chief justice. He was largely absent from the bench, but refused to resign. Rehnquist remained in office until his death on September 3, 2005. He was survived by his three children, James, Janet and Nancy. His wife Nan died in 1991.

Rehnquist was a lifelong Lutheran, and his funeral was attended by many politicians and judicial officials. Chief Justice John Roberts, a former Rehnquist clerk and Rehnquist's replacement on the court, served as one of the pallbearers. Sandra Day O'Connor and President George W. Bush were among the speakers at the service. Bush remarked, "In every chapter of his life, William Rehnquist stood apart for his powerful intellect and clear convictions."

In his 33 years on the Supreme Court, Rehnquist left his mark on the country's legal system. He was a man on a mission during his time as an associate justice, and as the chief justice he upheld his decidedly conservative views. A longtime critic of Rehnquist, lawyer Alan Dershowitz, described the late justice as "a man who made his career undermining the rights and liberties of American citizens," according to the Huffington Post website. John A. Jenkins, author of The Partisan: The Life of William Rehnquist, expressed a different take on Rehnquist's career. "Whatever you think of Rehnquist the man, you have to give him credit for sticking to an agenda, sticking to his guns and standing up for what he very passionately believed," Jenkins told CNN.

 

[Calculon]

He was just as wrong as rbg to stay on when he was not up to the job.