Justice Ginsburg to Resign?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by OldRegular, Sep 22, 2005.

  1. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has indicated that she does not desire to be the only woman on the Supreme Court. Furthermore, she has indicated that not just any woman will do. She has a list of acceptable women but the President has not asked for her advice.

    Apparently this woman, and former ACLU counsel, who won high marks for her judicial knowledge at her hearings before the Judiciary committee is ignorant of the constitution which empowers the president to appoint Justices.

    She also indicated, all this before a meeting of lawyers in NY, that she is not opposed to using the legal opinions of the foreign judiciary in establishing her rulings. That in itself seems to be grounds for impeachment and removal from the bench.

    Perhaps President Bush will add to her unhappiness by appointing Janice Rogers Brown or Pricilla Owens to the bench and she will resign. Hope springs eternal, they say!
     
  2. JamesBell

    JamesBell
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2005
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no way that Ginsburg will retire (or die for that matter) with a Republican in the White House. Her seat will be safe for the left for many years to come. It amazes me how she got through the process of confirmation so easily. She is a radical liberal, and has never tried to hide it. If the right tried to nominate someone of equal qualifications from their side, shots may be exchanged on the Senate floor before the vote took place.
     
  3. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Hopefully we will find out when Bush presents his next nominee.
     
  4. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Like her or not, she does provide balance on the
    Court.
     
  5. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    Balance? How can you say that? She provides a healthy dose of insanity. She has the Jewish seat; she was worth about $10 million and must have contributed a lot of money to Clinton. She belongs to the synagogue of Satan in my book.

    BiR, please come back to earth, ok?
     
  6. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    She gives balance to Scalia, who is as "radical right wing" as she is "radical left wing."

    Don't forget who recommended Justice Ginsburg to President Clinton........

    Regards, CMG,
    BiR
     
  7. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    10,988
    Likes Received:
    79
    What's it like on a flying saucer, BiR? Did Monica suggest Ruth to Bill since he seemed to like Jewish women? BiR, we don't need tuna with good taste; we need tuna that taste good. We don't need balance--we need carefully crafted law. The only balance she provides anyway is that she holds what is called the Jewish seat. BiR, call earth.
     
  8. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    We don't need balance on the court. We need justices who believe that the laws of the land must be based on the US Constitution as it was written and understood by those who wrote it, not who interpret our laws on the basis of foreign judicial temperment.
     
  9. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,949
    Likes Received:
    299
    You have to remember she was appointed by a democrat. Republicans, by and large, have always believed the President was entitled to his nominations. Perks of winning the election.

    Democrats do not feel that way.

    It was and always has been democrats that believe only nominees by a democrat president deserve to be confirmed. Others have to pass one litmus test or another. Sometimes more than one.
     
  10. PamelaK

    PamelaK
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,504
    Likes Received:
    0
    It used to be that any woman would do, as long as it was a woman. Now it has to a liberal woman.
    I don't think it should be any woman, no matter what religion or political leaning. I don't believe a woman should be in that level of authority/leadership. Well, there's my unpopular, politically incorrect, sure to be yelled at for 2 cents worth! ;)
     
  11. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,949
    Likes Received:
    299
    Better duck, Pamela. :eek:
     
  12. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    A point well worth considering. [​IMG]
     
  13. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    What's with the Jewish comments, is it a joke (it isn't funny) or are you in general anti-sematic?

    The "women comment" is beyond belief ... well for everywhere except on this board!
     
  14. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    No she doesn't.

    Balance is that the court rules on law rather than making it. That is the function of the Court. The "imbalance" you perceive in Scalia is his determination that wrong rulings in the past should be corrected to take us back to a place where "strict constructionism" can work.

    Ginsburg believes that the court is empowered to "create" new rights. Your statement is only correct to the extent that Scalia doesn't believe this and behaves accordingly.
     
  15. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know. Let's get the court to "look like America". That's what Dems want, right?

    That would mean only one member could be a liberal.
     
  16. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, regardless of opinions on the topic, can refrain from engaging in rumor and gossip? It damages the Christian witness (and before anyone accuses me of being aliberal, I'd be asking for the same if it were a conservative judge we were talking about).
     
  17. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Why?
     
  18. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's no reason, scriptural, societal, or moral, for anyone to hold that opinion, lest that person have gender prejudices.
     
  19. PamelaK

    PamelaK
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,504
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's no reason, scriptural, societal, or moral, for anyone to hold that opinion, lest that person have gender prejudices. </font>[/QUOTE]I guess it's all how one defines gender prejudice, John. I believe it is best for a man to hold positions of leadership in government. I prefer being led by men in government. If that makes me gender prejudiced, then I am gender prejudiced, I guess.
     
  20. Bro. James Reed

    Bro. James Reed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,992
    Likes Received:
    0
    Johnv,

    It has a lot to do with upbrining, and what we were taught and still believe is the proper role of a woman in society.

    I, for one, have limited hesitations about a woman being picked for the court, provided she is the kind I agree with.

    I have yet to convince myself that I could vote for a woman as President.

    If that is prejudice, then so be it. I was raised that a woman should be the caretaker of the home and tend to the needs of her husband and children. That is what my mother and grandmother did. Not only was it expected of them in society, but their joy was in seeing the contentment in the eyes of their loved ones for whom they were caring.

    I think the reason I have no real issues with a woman on the SC is because there are several justices and not just one woman in control. That is why I have a problem with a female president.

    It may be silly, but that was my upbringing, at home and at church, and I prefer the role of a strong woman in the home rather than a weak woman in government.
     

Share This Page

Loading...