Ruth Bader Ginsburg Misses Court

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because traditionally we have a balance judiciary and the vote count signals whether you have a true precedent, or what is essentially a political or philosophical difference. In the rare times that we have an unbalanced judiciary, even votes that are above 5-4 tend not to be viewed as strong precedent. They tend to be cited with “an Asterix” and the dissenting opinions are often more powerful than the holding of the court, and for those years and until the precedent precedent is corrected by a balanced court, our jurisprudence is in flux.

And unbalanced Supreme Court is never a good idea.

Hahaha it's only bad if it's conservative, lol

Not at all. It’s bad either way, which was the point you missed reading through your partisan glasses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because traditionally we have a balance judiciary and the vote count signals whether you have a true precedent, or what is essentially a political or philosophical difference. In the rare times that we have an unbalanced judiciary, even votes that are above 5-4 tend not to be viewed as strong precedent. They tend to be cited with “an Asterix” and the dissenting opinions are often more powerful than the holding of the court, and for those years and until the precedent precedent is corrected by a balanced court, our jurisprudence is in flux.

And unbalanced Supreme Court is never a good idea.

When have we “traditionally have a balance judiciary”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because traditionally we have a balance judiciary and the vote count signals whether you have a true precedent, or what is essentially a political or philosophical difference. In the rare times that we have an unbalanced judiciary, even votes that are above 5-4 tend not to be viewed as strong precedent. They tend to be cited with “an Asterix” and the dissenting opinions are often more powerful than the holding of the court, and for those years and until the precedent precedent is corrected by a balanced court, our jurisprudence is in flux.

And unbalanced Supreme Court is never a good idea.

When have we “traditionally have a balance judiciary”?

1937.

[Anonymous]

When have we had a Court stacked with Justices who made political speeches before being nominated?

People previously deemed unappointable are suddenly short-listed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When have we had a Court stacked with Justices who made political speeches before being nominated?

People previously deemed unappointable are suddenly short-listed.

Who has been deemed unappointable? And deemed by whom?

[Anonymous]

She's gonna retire soon, you don't go to Hopkins for a fever when you live in dc

[Anonymous]

The Top 20 Cancer Hospitals
1 Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Center, New York City
2 University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
3 Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
4 Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center, Boston
5 Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's gonna retire soon, you don't go to Hopkins for a fever when you live in dc

She better hang on until we get a legitimate President.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's gonna retire soon, you don't go to Hopkins for a fever when you live in dc

She better hang on until we get a legitimate President.

And, more importantly, a Senate who isn’t corrupt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's gonna retire soon, you don't go to Hopkins for a fever when you live in dc

She better hang on until we get a legitimate President.

And, more importantly, a Senate who isn’t corrupt.

See prior comment

[Anonymous]

So is she released? It said Sunday morning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we please focus on what’s important? Who’s Trump gonna nominate to replace her? Who else is that notorious? LOL.

Whatever you are wishing for RBG right now, may it be returned upon you and your loved ones in spades.

There is an entire thread with over 300 posts about Trump going to Walter Reed, with some posts wishing him the very worst. I hope you expressed your objection to the same sentiments over those ghoulish posts.

+1. And I like how RBG is hospitalized, yet the lead story in CNN.com today is about Trump’s health. Talk about Fake News! No wonder we don’t trust the media.

Well, it is not Fake News. There are legitimate questions about Trump's health and whether the official story is accurate -- just as there are the same questions regarding RBG's health and the real situation.

But I do agree that the presentation of facts -- both what is reported and how things are slanted -- has become much more partisan today on virtually every network.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is she released? It said Sunday morning?

It said she could be released as early as Sunday morning. I wouldn't think they would have made that statement if they weren't reasonably confident she was find and would be released soon. All it did was set expectations and, with it being a weekend, it wasn't really necessary because there is no court.

If we get to later and the day and she is still hospitalized, then it seems worth raising more questions, but it is a little early for that.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn't she retire when Obama was President?!

Hubris Arrogance.

What makes you folks believe that Moscow Mitch would have allowed Obama to fill the seat? Anyone with a memory longer than a gnat's would understand that history suggests he wouldn't.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why didn't she retire when Obama was President?!

Hubris Arrogance.

What makes you folks believe that Moscow Mitch would have allowed Obama to fill the seat? Anyone with a memory longer than a gnat's would understand that history suggests he wouldn't.

If she retired fairly shortly before his term ended, he probably wouldn't have. But I don't think McConnell would have been able to block, at least as he did Garland, an appointment made earlier. He may very well have tried to block an appointee who was as liberal as RBG where he would at least arguably have a legitimate rationale rather than a naked political move.