Tag: Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Psst, Consumer, Wanna Buy Your AlieNation?

 

Like many Americans right of center, the ads I see online feature plenty of vaguely patriotic products. Some of the stuff’s campaign gear. Some of it’s randomly tacti-cool. (Already got a tactical pen? Have you tried our tactical toothbrush yet? Got the toothbrush already, have you? What about a tactical toothpick?) Perhaps because my browsing habits are eclectic, the ads “targeting” me are eclectic, too. According to my ads, I’m a Trump-voting, militantly pro-life charismatic sedevacantist Catholic wiccan secular humanist who’s also militantly pro-choice and pining for the deceased Ruth Bader Ginsberg. I’m deaf, too. Because of earwax. But at least I’m not alone in that: judging by consumer ad complaints, the main symptom of Covid-19 is massive earwax buildup.

People who say they know about these things say that Covid’s virtual earwax buildup is a symptom of declining click-throughs on online ads. The more time we spend online without clicking through on ads, the more “bottom feeder” ads we see. Maybe I am who I am to online marketers because I don’t click through. Therefore I must “want”, in no particular order, Osteen Cubes, <insert name of Biblical woman here> Anointings, conversational Medieval Latin kits, “homeopathic” essential-oil blends consecrated to Jesus or my choice of goddess. Little lapel pins featuring lab flasks bubbling vacuities like “Science is real!” or light-splitting prisms spelling out “I’m gay for science!” in rainbow writing.

Rapid-fire lapel pin advertising directed my way, whether from right or left, never hits its target, since even if I saw a pin I liked, I wouldn’t buy it. If I saw an ad for a lapel pin featuring the smexxxiest anthropomorphized doped garnet laser — adorned with real synthetic garnet chips reading “She blinded me with science!” — well, I’d chuckle. But I wouldn’t click.

Filling the SCOTUS Seat Isn’t an Option, It’s an Obligation

 

With Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death and a newly vacant Supreme Court seat, the political madness of 2020 got even madder. But this moment is precisely why so many Republicans voted for Donald Trump despite their misgivings. A conservative majority on SCOTUS has been a signature goal of the party base going back to Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Now, 40 years later, the opportunity is finally here.

To quote Margaret Thatcher, this is no time to go wobbly. As expected, many are.

The center-right’s appetite for catering to the Democrat base instead of their own is insatiable. In reaction, GOP voters launched the Tea Party movement. When that fizzled, they elected Trump. Many Republicans still haven’t learned this lesson and want to surrender before any battle begins.

Trump and McConnell, Beware

 

I first met Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the winter of 1978 when we were both fellows at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford. Our interactions were always cordial. From the first time we talked, it was clear that she was a passionate advocate first, and a detached academic second. She was always immersed in filing certiorari petitions at the Supreme Court in connection with the hugely successful Women’s Rights Project, which she ran at the American Civil Liberties Union from 1972 until she was appointed to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1980.

Ginsburg had the rare quality of being both passionate and rigorous in her work, and she displayed those same traits of grit and excellence at every stage of her career. Moreover, her excellence as a lawyer was not confined to the women’s rights issues that brought her fame. She also displayed an impressive expertise on the many procedural, jurisdictional, and constitutional issues that form a huge part of the high court’s docket. It was surely possible to disagree with her on the merits of any given case, as I often did. But it was not possible to dispute the brilliance, knowledge, and determination that she brought to her lifetime’s work.

Ginsburg was nominated and confirmed to the United States Supreme Court in 1993 by a 96-3 vote, in a relative period of peace between the huge confirmation battles of Judge Robert Bork and Justice Clarence Thomas, and those of Justice Neil Gorsuch and Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The most bitter fights have been over Republican nominees, a pattern that promises to continue with the next nominee, whom President Trump has stated, surely incorrectly, that he has “an obligation” (as opposed to an option) to nominate. He has already announced it will be “a very brilliant woman.” The thought that the immediate struggle would be put off until after the election was dismissed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s immediate announcement that he will try to persuade the Senate to confirm a nominee.

Join Jim and Greg as they reflect on the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as well as President Trump’s reaction to the news. They also wade into the battle over whether Trump and Senate Republicans ought to press forward with a confirmation process before Election Day and counter Democrats’ insistence that doing so would somehow be unconstitutional. And they respond to the absurd overreactions of people like Barack Obama and Reza Aslan to the prospect of a new justice this year.

In Praise of Notorious RBG

 

Yes, I am serious. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg reflected an older liberal center-left sensibility that is largely missing, or driven underground, in the current political fever. I offer in evidence three notable instances, while recognizing the last must be qualified. A Rolling Stone interview with the authors who created the Notorious RBG persona suggests they saw some of the same attributes I praise.*

Most recently, in February of this year, with politics already at fever pitch, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shocked and discomforted the left at Georgetown Law School, as she participated in a program reflecting on ratification of the 19th Amendment. Recently, it became fashionable for Democrat-controlled states to claim they were now ratifying the 1972 Equal Rights Amendment. They expected to win by litigation, but Notorious RBG shot them down:

Speaking at Georgetown University Law Center at an event co-sponsored by the American Bar Association, Ginsburg poured cold water on the renewed hopes for the 1972 amendment becoming part of the U.S. Constitution after Virginia became the 38th state in January to ratify the measure that says “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.”

Member Post

 

Already by March this year the joke had begun to fly: “If 2020 were written as a movie script, it would be rejected as too outlandish.” And that was before progressives across the nation embarked on a curious gambit of furthering minority prosperity by burning minority businesses and neighborhoods to the ground, before the West […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

RBG Reveals She Has Been Receiving Chemotherapy for Liver Cancer Since May

 

Remember earlier this week when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was admitted to the hospital to treat an infection? As many thought, there was more to the story. On Friday, the 87-year-old jurist revealed that she is receiving chemotherapy for another recurrence of cancer.

Ginsburg claimed that the hospital visits this week and back in May were unrelated to her liver cancer, but admits she has been receiving treatment since May. She revealed the chemotherapy for the first time today.

She has no plans to retire from the Supreme Court. “I have often said I would remain a member of the Court as long as I can do the job full steam,” Ginsburg said. “I remain fully able to do that.”

It’s New Hampshire primary day! Get prepared with your Tuesday installment of the Three Martini Lunch. Join Jim and Greg as they applaud Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for telling her fellow supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment that the effort died in 1982 and they need to start over again if they want to see it succeed. They also cringe as CNBC reminds us that Bernie Sanders would more than double federal spending every year due to his big government plans for health care, education, climate change and more. Meanwhile, Jim discusses the calculation from many on the right calculation that a Sanders nomination means an easy win for President Trump. And they roll their eyes as Tom Steyer tries to one-up the Democratic field by calling for a $22-per-hour minimum wage.

Presidential Ukraine Phone Transcript: Nothingburger? Not Exactly.

 
President Donald Trump // shutterstock.com

President Trump has declassified and released the transcript of his phone conversation in July with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy (See our post here.) The transcript is a complete nothingburger when it comes to the loony Left’s (and NeverTrumper’s) insane desire to remove President Trump from office. Trump did not, as had been alleged by partisan hacks in the Fake News, threaten to withhold military aid from Ukraine unless they gave him dirt on Biden. (Why this would have been an impeachable offense is not clear to me, in any case.)

Justice Ginsburg Completes Radiation Therapy for Malignant Tumor

 

The Supreme Court announced today that Associate Justice Ruth Ginsburg, 86, has completed a three week course of radiation therapy at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center for a malignant tumor on her pancreas. The tumor was detected during a blood test in early July and confirmed through a biopsy on July 31. In addition to the radiation therapy, Ginsburg also had a bile duct stent installed. According to the Office of Public Information at the Supreme Court, the tumor was “definitively treated” and there is no sign of disease elsewhere in her body.

Ginsburg has had cancer numerous times. Most recently, just last December she had a lobectomy on the left side of her lungs to remove cancerous nodules, also performed at Memorial Sloan Kettering. That procedure caused her to miss oral arguments at the Supreme Court, the first time she’d been absent since joining the court.

The Real Story Behind ‘On the Basis of Sex’

 

The new highly publicized movie “On the Basis of Sex” offers a somewhat fictionalized account of the early professional life of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Intermingled with her life story, the film presents an idealized narrative of her early legal crusade against gender discrimination, fought in part with her late (and most devoted) husband, the eminent tax lawyer Martin Ginsburg.

Ginsburg argued or participated in several of the early influential cases on sex discrimination and went on to found the Women’s Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. When she started teaching, she was one of only about 20 female law professors in the United States. She was very much a pioneer in the women’s rights movement, motivated by her own life experiences. She had on numerous occasions been rejected from positions solely on grounds of her sex, notwithstanding her great academic distinction, and was well aware that similar obstacles fell in the path of other women who sought to make a career in the law. The film goes into these issues in depth, but I shall not dwell on them here. I am a lawyer, not a film critic, so I will comment only on Justice Ginsburg’s substantive arguments against gender discrimination

Most legal writers support Justice Ginsburg’s position that both the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibit government discrimination on the basis of sex. I offer a split verdict on her legal efforts and of those who followed in her path. I think that she was right on the early cases that sought to get rid of senseless distinctions based on gender. But as the law subsequently developed, she and the courts pushed the crusade too far, creating new forms of gender imbalance that the law should have resisted. Failure to understand the economics of discrimination have led courts to impose new versions of the very discrimination that the law is intended to eliminate. In general, truly competitive markets do a better job in rooting out gender discrimination than government regulation.

Ruth Ginsburg’s Going to Die (or Resign) — Can the Left Handle It?

 

Ruth Bader Ginsberg was missing from the bench on Monday as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for several cases. This absence raises speculation about her health. It’s the first time she’s missed oral arguments in 25 years. That seems impressive, but on the other hand it also seems like a basic requirement of the job. In any case, the 85-year-old far-left justice is recovering from surgery she underwent last month to remove two cancerous tumors from her lungs. Ginsburg’s tumors were found after she fell in her office in November and broke two ribs, an ironically fortunate event, as it turned out.

We all wish her well health-wise. At least I do. My mother died from cancer that was present in her lungs. But let’s not fool ourselves: Ginsburg’s 85. Even without the cancer she’s at the end of her time on the court. There’s a very high probability (not certainty) that she will either resign due to health reasons or go join her friend the great Antonin Scalia in the hereafter within the next six years. And that means that President Trump is going to nominate her replacement. And when that happens Democrats are going to lose their everlasting skeet balls.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss the allegation emerging now against Brett Kavanaugh but dating back to the 1980’s, and while the allegation is disturbing, they agree a lot more specifics need to come out before it can be taken credibly. They also applaud Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for blasting the rank partisanship that has become a hallmark of Supreme Court confirmation debates. And they slam the New York Times for clearly implying that UN Ambassador Nikki Haley ordered $52,000 curtains for her ambassadorial residence in New York City, when the same article makes it clear the spending decision was made in the Obama administration.

Richard Epstein reacts to the recent Supreme Court decision in Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis, defending the right of employers to use arbitration and avoid class action lawsuits.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg – Politician

 

RBG New RepublicMore than a few eyebrows have been raised recently about the conspicuous entry of another distinguished voice into the maelstrom of the current presidential race. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has taken up herself in a series of interviews and pronouncements to lace into Donald Trump and all but endorse Hillary Clinton as President of the United States. In her discussion with New York Times Supreme Court correspondent Adam Liptak, she sounded just like another partisan political figure opining in the sad state of politics in the United States.

At one level there was nothing surprising in these particular remarks. Anyone who has paid the slightest attention to her work on and off the Court in recent years knows of her diehard liberal views on virtually all these issues. Her denunciations of Donald Trump, her endorsement of Merrick Garland for the open seat on the Supreme Court, her criticism of the Senate to move forward on the nomination, her intense dislike of Heller on the Second Amendment, and of Citizens United on First Amendment protection of corporate speech are all part of the basic liberal playbook to which she subscribes. Only her reference to her late husband Martin Ginsburg that “Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand,” gives some wry sense of the level of her discontent.

Yet, even if predictable, it is also disquieting. Her current views show a quest for the lime light that is inconsistent, I think, with the effort of a justice of the Supreme Court, no matter how passionate her views, to keep to the judicial role exclusively, so as to avoid even the appearance of bias in her decisions. But anyone who looks at the picture that the New Republic took of her on September 28, 2014 bathed in red, while wearing of judicial robes in a grand room in the Supreme Court building, knows exactly what is going on even before reading the title attached to Jeffrey Rosen’s piece, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg is an American Hero.” Not exactly the title that precedes a detailed dissection of her written opinions.

Member Post

 

Because she didn’t resign during the last six years. If for any reason we lose a member of the Supreme Court during the rest of O’s presidency, he will have to get his nominee through a Republican senate. RBG is 81 years old and appears to be looking to stay through the rest of this […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.