Forum Thread

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

22,483 January 7, 2019 at 08:52 PM
Quote :
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday will miss oral arguments for the first time as the 85-year-old recovers from surgery to remove cancerous nodules from her left lung.
https://www.breitbart.com/politic...ime-court/

She's never missed an argument in her entire SCOTUS career, which is admirable, but if she's no longer able to execute her duties as a Justice, doesn't she have an obligation to step down? And if she won't, should impeachment be put on the table?

SCOTUS has a very full plate and we need Justices that can keep up the pace. There's too much at stake right now and she has a tremendous number of health issues that she is having to focus on (and rightly so).

EDIT: While I clarified my OP in subsequent posts below, the OP itself is still causing confusion because it's not clear. My apologies for that. Of course she should not be forced to resign for missing one day, or even a few weeks. I'm thinking there needs to be a timeframe though. How about if she misses a full month? Or three? What if it becomes clear she will not be able to return to work but refuses to resign? I don't think, as some have suggested here, this can or should be left with an indefinite timeframe. This is not like a person on maternity leave where someone else can simply cover for them while they are away from the office.

391 Comments

3 4 5 6 7

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Dec 2008
"Crooked"
22,483 Posts
Original Poster
Pro
#61
Quote from ballershanelle
:
If RBG retires, in May 2019, per se, she'll be smack dab in the Presidental Election cycle. In the Spring, a whole year prior the 2016 election, Scalia died. McConnell claimed, "no vote should happen because the American People deserve to be heard/pick the POTUS in 2016."

So, no Scotus will be picked until after the 2020 vote, according to recent proceedings. I'll refresh my memory or knowledge, with more research, later today.
That was known as "the Biden rule" and Democrats only seemed to have a problem with it when it negatively impacted them for some reason Comfort
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
My strategy is simple, yet difficult to execute. Buy at major lows and sell at major peaks, which I've successfully called for the last 20 years.--TEDCRUZ Rofl2
"I do like argue for the sake of argue .....And lastly, I do nit-pick and I do go on tangent"--TRNT Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)
"harassing daca, many of then can vote in a yaear is foolish but not beyond those who support trump." --TRNT Dontknow
"just be happy I am not juvenile enough to create signatures of people's quotes." --TRNT BK: Wait Wot?!?!? LMAO
"So the question that is another HUUGGEE Big League What has President Trump done yo us: edge cases goood or baaad?" --TRNT Dontknow
"I would agree that Obama being black was a factor in my voting."........"i did not vote for someone based on their skin." --TRNT Dontknow

"When Was America Great?" "The late 1940's when a woman's place was in the home, blacks knew their place, gays stayed in the closet, and America was victorious and unchallenged in the world cause only we had nuclear weapons."--TEDCRUZ
"If Trump wins by a landslide (more than 5 points/1 state?), I will never challenge Breitbart as a source again" --ASG
"The only way 538 is wrong is if the people in my signature are right and Trump wins in a landslide." --ASG
"I just believe the Republicans found the one candidate (aside from Ted Cruz) who will likely lose to somebody this flawed. It's really more embarrassing for the loser than it is a triumph for the winner." --ASG
"A trump landslide? Lol...Let's make an unfriendly bet... If Trump wins this election, I'll happily leave the podium forever." --SKIMAN
"I'll bet you $1000 that Trump doesn't win, provided there's another $1000 bet that she's not prosecuted if he does" --TEDCRUZ
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Dec 2008
"Crooked"
22,483 Posts
Original Poster
Pro
#62
Quote from LivninSC
:
Wait, so you've never missed a day of work for health reasons? What if she was pregnant and out on maternity leave (assuming she was a much younger woman)? Would that be ok?
Of course.

Quote :
People get sick, people need to have operations and recover afterwards. Isn't there a Federal law that gives them time off work for these things while guaranteeing their job for a defined period of time and allow them to come back to it? I don't have a problem with that, or are you suggesting that we violate Federal law in this specific case?
I'm not. I'm asking at what point should she either step down or be removed to ensure a fully functioning court. 2 months? A year? I don't claim to have an answer, but I do know it should not be indefinite and I think that's how some people want to treat this.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Dec 2008
"Crooked"
22,483 Posts
Original Poster
Pro
#63
Quote from TRNT
:
if it is a win, declare a win loudly and keep repeating ad nauseam, if it s push or a mild lose, still declare a win by dishonest methods. if it is a clear lose, declare and settle for a push.

i have seen this claim of faux symmetry many many times in recent years. it is quite nauseating and dishonest.

not even giving a hearing several month before a president's terms is over is indeed unprecedented and indeed at a whole new level. still some say it is the same for both sides.

yes, quite nauseating.
What the hell are you going on about now? Dontknow

This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread and you aren't even responding to another post although I suspect you're doing that passive aggressive thing you do with me to someone else here. Please stop these childish games.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Dec 2008
"Crooked"
22,483 Posts
Original Poster
Pro
#64
Quote from Dr. J
:
You can actually look that up [finder.com]:

Odds of dying within 1, 10, 15, 20 and 30 years, respectively (@ age) [for women]:

20
0.04%
0.22%
0.51%
1.42%
3.38%

75
2.53%
14.80%
35.53%
83.71%
99.52%

85
7.38%
38.83%
74.72%
99.26%
100.00%

So it appears the odds of a woman dying in 1 year (or 5 years) at 85 are about triple that at age 75. And of course, this all makes sense for all those that aren't obtuse about the subject.
Yep, that's a fact of life. The odds of dying especially with surgery, disease, or broken bones goes up as you get older. Hopefully she recovers from this spade of misfortune, but it's a tougher road now than if she was 30.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Dec 2008
"Crooked"
22,483 Posts
Original Poster
Pro
#65
Quote from HEATBaller
:
Why focus on RBG how many other judges have missed oral arguments for other reasons ?
Let's add those number up since you opened the door.
In any case she deserves her recovery time. As long as it takes.
I disagree. This is not a position where we can just swap in a replacement for her like a company can for someone on maternity leave. This should not be an open ended "as long as it takes" sort of deal.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2007
Free hugs!
13,299 Posts
810 Reputation
Global Mod
#66
Quote from blueknob
:
Indeed I hope her recovery goes well also in spite of how much I vehemently disagree with her so many of her decisions.
I can absolutely hate someone's political choices and never wish them harm. I hope at least our majority also can.

I snipped the rest of your quote, but I now wonder. Has a SCOTUS ever been removed? Guess I never looked. I suspect it can't happen in the next month, which means whoever wins in 2020 gets the appointment regardless.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2007
God Bless The USA
18,920 Posts
2,875 Reputation
#67
Quote from uniquename
:
I can absolutely hate someone's political choices and never wish them harm. I hope at least our majority also can.

I snipped the rest of your quote, but I now wonder. Has a SCOTUS ever been removed? Guess I never looked. I suspect it can't happen in the next month, which means whoever wins in 2020 gets the appointment regardless.
IIRC impeachment begins in the House then goes to the Senate.

I have a hunch there would be a better chance of today's House funding the wall than that of impeaching a sitting SCOTUS judge and handing an appointment to the current POTUS.....
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Feb 2009
L7: Teacher
2,778 Posts
242 Reputation
#68
Quote from uniquename
:
I can absolutely hate someone's political choices and never wish them harm. I hope at least our majority also can.
Edit: people have bad reading comprehension and will misinterpret my original reply. So I'm editing this to simply say I disagree.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by northerlights January 8, 2019 at 09:48 PM.
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Aug 2010
FW expatriot
1,220 Posts
89 Reputation
#69
Deleted b/c was in response to edited post
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by germanpope January 8, 2019 at 09:51 PM.
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Feb 2009
L7: Teacher
2,778 Posts
242 Reputation
#70
Quote from HEATBaller
:
Why focus on RBG how many other judges have missed oral arguments for other reasons ?
Because her reason for missing them is far more serious, may be chronic, and may have additional health issues that include the loss of her mental faculties?
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2007
Free hugs!
13,299 Posts
810 Reputation
Global Mod
#71
Quote from northerlights
:
Edit: people have bad reading comprehension and will misinterpret my original reply. So I'm editing this to simply say I disagree.
I think you know what I meant.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2004
L10: Grand Master
16,546 Posts
1,286 Reputation
#72
Quote from blueknob
:
Of course.


I'm not. I'm asking at what point should she either step down or be removed to ensure a fully functioning court. 2 months? A year? I don't claim to have an answer, but I do know it should not be indefinite and I think that's how some people want to treat this.
While I agree you we're what 3 weeks in, after 1 missed session? Seems a little bit early on to be asking is what I'm saying. Peace
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jul 2010
L10: Grand Master
7,329 Posts
337 Reputation
#73
Quote from LivninSC
:
While I agree you we're what 3 weeks in, after 1 missed session? Seems a little bit early on to be asking is what I'm saying. Peace
The far leftist fringe radical has been AWOL for quite some time...

Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Apr 2008
FW Expatriot
5,994 Posts
88 Reputation
#74
Quote from blueknob
:
I'm not. I'm asking at what point should she either step down or be removed to ensure a fully functioning court. 2 months? A year? I don't claim to have an answer, but I do know it should not be indefinite and I think that's how some people want to treat this.
To answer your question. Missing 1 day is too early to talk about her stepping down because she can't do her duties. 2 days, still too early. 3 days, still too early. In a few days, it will be a week and that's still too early. Maybe after a month, it should be heavily considered.

I think she should have stepped down years ago, but for other reasons.

In 2013, she was asked why she didn't step down. She explained herself. She also said that she doesn't have to worry because the next president after Obama will be Democrat. That tells me that she possibly planned to consider stepping down around 2019.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Mar 2011
L9: Master
5,992 Posts
1,130 Reputation
#75
Exactly, the next Scotus that dies or retires, will follow this so-called, Biden rule, that McConnell utilized, before the 2016 Election. Basically, after mid-terms, the Presidental Election Cycle starts and the Next SCOTUS will be picked by the Re-Elected or Newly Elected POTUS. The court functioned w/o all members for more than, two years after Scalia's death. Consequences were accepted, the rule was the rule.
...on that note, RBG should relax and heal.

Time? The approx. timeline is already set, by the Biden rule, per se. Scalia's death is the best example to show how it worked. No nom votes during the POTUS Election Cycle, because the people needed to vote for the sitting or New POTUS. Atleast, 2 years, after mid-terms, or until a POTUS takes the oath in January, after the POTUS Election. Additional hearings and meetings maybe needed before a confirmation vote.
So, more than 2 years+, w/o a full S.Court bench has happened, good or bad. The 116th Congress needs to be involved w details and dates, IMO. No vague, interpretations. McConnell put the rule into play, so, voters expect the same to happen, the next go around, +/- any Congressional changes.

Edit: Personal Time:
RGB is a Federal employee and there are rules to follow, regarding her leave, sick or anything else. Add, a physician's note and her lengthy , time in that position, she has options. Rules gives her protection so, when she needs it, like now, it's there. Her job can't just be yanked! There are guidelines to follow and for damn sure, a year or two, on leave is easy to do, w a longtime, fed employee. Si, again, RBG should relax and rest.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by ballershanelle January 9, 2019 at 01:34 PM.
Page 5 of 27
3 4 5 6 7
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Link Copied to Clipboard