Posted on 07/10/2015 5:18:55 PM PDT by bestintxas
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says that the liberal justices on the court try to speak with one voice when writing opinions as often as possible.
"The stimulus actually began many many years before ... when the court announced its decision in Bush v. Gore," Ginsburg told NPR.
The liberal justices were in the minority in the 5-4 decision, which resolved the issue surrounding the recount in Florida over the 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore, putting Bush in the White House.
However, each of the four dissenting justices wrote their own opinions because they "were unable to get together and write one opinion."
The result ended up as a confusing mess for the media, as some media outlets mistakenly reported that the decision was actually 7-2. Special: 73 Year Old Grandma Looks 50 With This Skin Trick After that experience, Ginsburg told NPR, "we agreed" that "when we are in that situation again, let's be in one opinion."
She explained that this is also important so that the lower courts as well as the public understand what was decided.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
To admit the law is not important but to brag about the inclination to be liberal toward it is not what a judge does. It is supposed to be blind to all and impartial.
The open bias is grounds for removal.
So the leftist half of the court marches in lockstep, and the right scatters in every which direction. Just like in every other arena.
Shut up you old hag.
I hope this hag stays on the court long enough so that Hussein doesn’t have the opportunity to appoint another one.
That is true and the country club judges on our side are feckless and weak.
WHERE IS OUR CONGRESS? PAGING TED CRUZ!!! Start impeachment proceedings IMMEDIATELY.
I really do not care about anything this perverted old hag has to say. She is corrupt and a deceiver.
They speak with one voice. Even the voices that should have recused themselves for vested interests in the case at hand.
Liberals insist on diversity in everything but thought.
Not everyone has realized that most, if not all, elected criminals (some sociopaths, in the age of egalitarianism) really believe that citizens elect them to give life to their biases, ignorance and whims, not the wishes of their constituency. It's not really complicated.
Unfortunately, the Judiciary has degenerated to the same dysfunctional embarrassing level. The astounding thing is that, in such a short time the appointees have come to consider it an entitlement!
Alcoholic, pervert, racist, senility mentally challenged, nothing matters.
Bias is an idiotic argument that will never go anywhere and is the worst possible argument. All it does is, euphemistically, have everyone running in circles screaming accomplishing NOTHING.
Why? EVERYONE IS BIASED. There is not a judge dead or alive that wasn’t/isn’t biased. That is why this argument is a dead ender and is just designed to make people think something is being accomplished.
What SHOULD be argued is why the decision is legally wrong, precidentially wrong, etc. Argue why Conservative judges should be appointed.
I find the “THEY ARE BIASED IMPEACH THEM” argument horribly upsetting. It’s as bad as the “activist judges one” (HINT: the are ALL activist).
We will never get anywhere on this unless we make valid arguments that mean something. These arguments are like arguing that water is wet.
*sigh*
And my Socialist sister actually believes that JEB stuffed the ballot boxes to help GWB. You cannot fix stupid.
Ruth Bader-Meinhof and Supreme do not go together. She’s simply to obtuse to be embarrassed.
What.a nation when a little godless,gargoyle who fell off a tall building facade can become a Supreme Court Justice. And a great, brilliant conservative Robert Bork got raked over the coals in an unjust rejected manner. But heaven sees and records all.
Concurring opinions are rare, no?
(Isn’t one opinion for the majority and one for the minority the rule rather than the exception?)
Nothing her, sotomayer, or hagan can say matters.
They will be the first to go along with Roberts and Kennedy when things get corrected.
Mind numb idiots in black robes. So much for originality and individual thought. Somehow they got Johnny Roberts to join them in their little consensus.
Consider NSA surveillance and Valerie Jarret.
I don’t think she’s bragging about inclination towards liberal or conservative readings but saying that KISS applies to Supreme Court rulings as well. Short and unified is they way to make sure people read opinions.
I don’t think she’s wrong with that assessment of getting people to read and she’s probably right to say conservative justices will start doing the same.
This could even mean fewer Kennedy opinions :D. This makes my non-sentimental side happy :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.