Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court justice and legal pioneer for gender equality, dies at 87
Such a champion. She will be missed.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court justice and legal pioneer for gender equality, dies at 87
Such a champion. She will be missed.
Last edited by guido; 09-18-2020 at 08:47 PM.
Guy Washburn
Photography > www.guywashburn.com
“Instructions for living a life: Pay attention. Be astonished. Tell about it.”
– Mary Oliver
A great historic, courageous American hero lost, the passing of Notorious RBG will be felt for years, I am sad beyond words. RIP, may your last wishes be granted.
The older I get the faster I was Brian Clare
Rest in peace. I hope one of her last wishes comes true:
Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed."
“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president." Moscow Mitch, March 2016
“#pedotrump's nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.” Moscow Mitch, 9-18-2020
Hey, fuck you Moscow Mitch
Jay Dwight
Now cracks a noble heart.—Good night, sweet Justice,
And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!
John Lewis and RBG.
Goes without saying, but I'm saying it anyways, fuck cancer.
I understand the anger and pain.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=o6iaSWSB7rE
May she rest well, her loved ones find peace knowing a truly significant woman has passed from this life into history.
Josh Simonds
www.nixfrixshun.com
www.facebook.com/NFSspeedshop
www.bicycle-coach.com
Vsalon Fromage De Tęte
I hate to defile this thread with the following statement, but in this day and age, after having read the story at the link below I couldn't help but think this:
>>>> In a zillion years I can't image our current President writing this sort of story: https://nyti.ms/33IgP9C
"My Unlikely Friendship With Ruth Bader Ginsburg"
I was a young, African-American Southerner, working in a Republican administration. But I loved Bach’s Goldberg Variations, and that was enough for her.
Josh Simonds
www.nixfrixshun.com
www.facebook.com/NFSspeedshop
www.bicycle-coach.com
Vsalon Fromage De Tęte
So, Supreme Court appointments are clearly partisan and deeply political.
Given that, can someone mansplain to me why appointments are for life but a President can only serve two terms?
Came up again last night and I can’t come up with a rationale that comes close to making sense
Colin Mclelland
president limited to prevent exactly the lifetime authoritarian system our founders escaped
justices lifetime to give them independence from the branches that nominate and confirm them--those branches are by virtue of functions and term limits more short-term focused, and influenced by passions and acute situations. The justices being lifelong are free to hopefully have long term vision and commitment to founding principles and law.
A couple of points:
The lifetime authoritarian system was a monarchy with parliamentary democracy (albeit it had a bit of a way to go to be more democratic in the 1700s). They were not escaping a brutal dictatorship. And the two term limit only came in after Roosevelt died.
I get the independence point, in theory. But, it does not really work as envisaged. The latest nominee (young, ultra conservative) has been chosen for political purposes. They know it. She knows it. She attends a function in her honour in the White House. The optics of this look terrible (and indeed the function seems to have laid low a number of people with the virus, thus re-enforcing the amateur hour point of view of the current White House). As soon as you insert politics into the judiciary, it undermines the judiciary.
And finally, you don't need life time appointment (imo) to be independent. 10, 15, 20 years of occupying high office free from interference from other branches of government is more than sufficient to be independent.
Thanks! but...
Surely the electorate can be trusted to vote for someone new. If someone wants a regime they’ll just over rule the two term limit wont they? Given decent politicians are so rare it just seems a shame to me to put a time limit on one if you eventually get one.
Wouldn’t a supreme court judge feel just as independent with a 20 year term? But mostly, how does anyone even pretend it’s independent when the appointments are so absurdly partisan?
Colin Mclelland
John Adams wrote the following in his Thoughts on Government in 1776:
There’s probably a section of the Federalist Papers that defends lifetime appointments of Supreme Court justices, but the rationale is likely pretty similar. Not sure if Montesquieu got into that level of detail in his writings on separation of powers.THE dignity and stability of government in all its branches, the morals of the people and every blessing of society, depends so much upon an upright and skillful administration of justice, that the judicial power ought to be distinct from both the legislative and executive, and independent upon both, that so it may be a check upon both, as both should be checks upon that. The Judges therefore should always be men of learning and experience in the laws, of exemplary morals, great patience, calmness, coolness and attention. Their minds should not be distracted with jarring interests; they should not be dependant upon any man or body of men. To these ends they should hold estates for life in their offices, or in other words their commissions should be during good behaviour, and their salaries ascertained and established by law. For misbehaviour the grand inquest of the Colony, the House of Representatives, should impeach them before the Governor and Council, where they should have time and opportunity to make their defence, but if convicted should be removed from their offices, and subjected to such other punishment as shall be thought proper.
The President can’t just over rule term limits. The President has zero power in that regard. The term limit for the office of President is specified in the Constitution of the United States of America as the 22nd amendment. To change that rule, Congress would have to vote to repeal and then 3/4’s of the 50 states would have to ratify that repeal in order for it to go into effect. That’s very difficult to accomplish and takes so long that anyone in power as President would be out of power before the ratification is completed.
No one thinks that judges are independent or non-partisan. They are human and one hopes that they are at least scholars. The goal is to create an institution that over time effects the environment of independence and non-partisanship and thereby becomes - again, over time and perhaps even only in retrospect - representative of the country’s view of what justice is, while buffering the legal system from more cataclysmic changes that would come from a disregard for history and legal precedent.
The suggestion that previous courts have been "liberal" strikes me as specious. They have been progressive, I think, in the sense that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Incremental progress has been made toward "a more perfect union," and the self-evident truth which is the cornerstone of the Declaration of Independence.
But successive administrations and courts are like rivers that suddenly change course, sometimes dramatically. Barret, if confirmed, may move the majority away from the course Roberts would have charted, were the court more balanced.
Jay Dwight
If Amy Coney Barrett is appointed as a Supreme Court Justice, she’ll be the first non-Ivy Leaguer to have been appointed in a long time...that would apply to Biden (non-Ivy leaguer) too if he is elected President. tRump, Obama, W, Clinton, George HW Bush...32 years in a row. There have been 114 SCJ’s, 49 have had law degrees and 32 of those have their degree from an Ivy League law school. All of the current SJC’s have their law degree from an Ivy League school and the last SJC who didn’t, retired in 2010.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...supreme-court/
https://roanoke.com/opinion/editoria...898e1f68b.html
rw saunders
hey, how lucky can one man get.
Justice Souter who was picked by Bush started voting with the conservatives and ended up voting with the more liberal justices. Justice Powell was picked by Nixon and lived to regret supporting the death penalty and voting to uphold anti-sodomy laws during his term. Justice Blackmun wrote Roe v. Wade. He was also picked by Nixon. Justice Kagan who was picked by Obama has voted with Justice Roberts 78% of the time.
The 5-4 cases are often the most newsworthy, but RBG used to say all the time, most cases are 9-0 votes - unanimous decisions. 5-4 is only 19% of cases. 9-0 is 36% and 7-2 & 8-1 are 15%.
Last edited by j44ke; 10-04-2020 at 07:41 PM.
Bookmarks