NY Times: Trump 'right' about Ginsburg's comments

[Revmitchell]

The New York Times's editorial board says Donald Trump is "right" that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's criticisms of him are inappropriate.

"Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg needs to drop the political punditry and the name-calling," the newspaper said in an editorial published Wednesday.


Ginsburg earlier this week slammed the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, saying she "can't imagine what the country would be" like if Trump were to serve as president. The justice also called Trump a "faker" who "has no consistency about him."
Trump said in response it was "highly inappropriate" that a Supreme Court judge get involved with a political campaign.

The New York Times said Ginsburg's comments show why Supreme Court justices normally remain silent during presidential campaigns.

"In this election cycle in particular, the potential of a new president to affect the balance of the court has taken on great importance, with the vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia," the paper's editorial board said.

"As Justice Ginsburg pointed out, other justices are nearing an age when retirement would not be surprising. That makes it vital that the court remain outside the presidential process."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/287509-nyt-trump-right-about-ginsburgs-comments

 

[InTheLight]

You of all people quoting the New York Times. LOL.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo

 

[Alcott]

You of all people quoting the New York Times. LOL.

The New York Times, of all publications, publishing an editorial that merits being quoted.

LOL

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Even a broken (analog) clock is correct twice a day.

 

[Rippon]

It's a random act of journalism.

 

[777]

You know she was way over the line when it's too much for the NYT to take.

She's actively campaigning against Trump while sitting on the USSC. That right there is a conflict of interest and a violation of the separation of powers.

Rumor has it that RBG wants to retire soon, she is 83 and in poor health, and she's going to retire now matter who wins it this year. She won't move to New Zealand, though.

 

[Zaac]

You know she was way over the line when it's too much for the NYT to take.

She's actively campaigning against Trump while sitting on the USSC. That right there is a conflict of interest and a violation of the separation of powers.

Rumor has it that RBG wants to retire soon, she is 83 and in poor health, and she's going to retire now matter who wins it this year. She won't move to New Zealand, though.

This has NOTHING to do with separation of powers.

Members of the legislative branch comment on and campaign for the executive branch elections all the time.

Is that too a conflict of interest A's a violation of separation of powers?



Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

 

[Revmitchell]

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Thursday offered a mea culpa for a series of recent remarks in which she dreaded the possibility of Donald Trump occupying the White House and called the Republican presidential candidate a “faker.”

“On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised, and I regret making them,” she said in a written statement.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/07/14/judging-justice-ginsburgs-trump-mea-culpa/

 

[777]

I'm glad she apologized, but it's too little too late. She has showed her cards and there's no turning back.

The judicial branch is different, since it's common they have to issue a ruling on matters of the other two branches.

The executive branch can campaign for/against the legislative branch, and vice-versa. That's NOT a conflict of interest because they aren't ruling for one side, DUH.