Supreme Court's Ginsburg says at New York lecture `any woman will not do'

AP ^ | 9/21/05 | Nahal Toosi

[Crackingham]

Ruth Bader Ginsburg told an audience Wednesday that she doesn't like the idea of being the only female justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. But in choosing to fill one of the two open positions on the court, "any woman will not do," she said.

There are "some women who might be appointed who would not advance human rights or women's rights," Ginsburg told those gathered at the New York City Bar Association.

The retirement of Ginsburg's colleague Sandra Day O'Connor has fueled speculation about whether President Bush will nominate a woman to her position.

Federal Judge John G. Roberts originally was Bush's nominee for O'Connor's seat but now is facing a Senate vote on the position of chief justice, a role empty after the death of William H. Rehnquist.

Ginsburg stressed that the president should appoint a "fine jurist," adding that there are many women who fit that mold.

"I have a list of highly qualified women, but the president has not consulted me," Ginsburg said during a brief interview Wednesday night.

Ginsburg arrived in New York to attend an annual lecture named in her honor. The lecture's focus is on women and the law.

This year, Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland, delivered it, while Ginsburg participated in a question-and-answer session afterward.

During the session, which was attended by hundreds of people, Ginsburg defended some of the justices' references to laws in other countries when making decisions, a practice strongly opposed by some U.S. legislators. The justice said using foreign sources does not mean giving them superior status in deciding cases.

"I will take enlightenment wherever I can get it," she said. "I don't want to stop at a national boundary."

[Les_Miserables]

Talk about taking a personal ideology to the bench! Holy Cow, if this statement is not grounds for impeachment something is wrong. Nothing wrong with her saying it; just a major problem with a SCOTUS Justice saying it. Judiciary committee should call her in to explain exactly what this means in terms of the cases that come before the SCOTUS. If they involve "women's" rights, clearly she should recuse herself at a minimum.

[Sthitch]

There is not a single word you wrote that I disagree with, I was simply commenting on the total lack of decorum exhibited by those people who orbit around His Royal Highness William Jefferson Klinton

[pangaea6]

I agree this woman is a nut-case. Shame on the Rep. Senators who voted for her.

[pangaea6]

Hopefully her health is as bad as they say, but with her views I see her pulling a Rehnquist.

[TRY ONE]

""There are "some women who might be appointed who would not advance human rights or women's rights,"

It is not a judge's job to advance rights. This remark should disqualify her immediately."
___________________________________

Agreed!

[geezerwheezer]

She is not only a "nut case", she is a dangerous "nut case!!" Any fool that looks at other nation's laws for application to the US Constitution is a serious threat to the well being of every American citizen! This loon scares the crap out of me.

[sono]

Give Justice Buzzi a few drinks ...

[neverdem]

Just heard Rush dscribing her nonsense.

[ArGee]

But in choosing to fill one of the two open positions on the court, "any woman will not do," she said.

If I parse that sentence correctly, it says that there isn't a woman who can do the job.

How sexist can you get?

Shalom.

[MozarkDawg]

Considering the history so far, I have to agree with her ... any woman will not do for the Surpreme Court.

(Now ducking cream pies being flung at me by feminists ... )

[dighton]

"I have a list of highly qualified women, but the president has not consulted me," Ginsburg said during a brief interview Wednesday night.

Don't hold you breath, sweetheart.

[dighton]

... your breath, even.

[MEGoody]

There are "some women who might be appointed who would not advance human rights or women's rights," Ginsburg told those gathered at the New York City Bar Association.

Ruthie, you apparently do not know that, as an SC justice, your job is to handle cases based upon the constitution, not based upon your desire to advance some cause.

We want a female on the SC who will do her job, not advance her causes.

[MEGoody]

There are "some women who might be appointed who would not advance human rights or women's rights," Ginsburg told those gathered at the New York City Bar Association.

Ruthie, you apparently do not know that, as an SC justice, your job is to handle cases based upon the constitution, not based upon your desire to advance some cause.

We want a female on the SC who will do her job, not advance her causes.

[Trust but Verify]

No kidding. It's appalling actually. It's hard to believe this isn't against judicial ethics.

[absolootezer0]

that reminds me of something, maybe someone will be nice enough to explain this to me...
if lib/dem/socialists think that land/ wealth, etc should be taken from the rich and distributed to the poor, how does that work with emminent domain, where they take from the poor to give to the rich?

[Tarkin]

Maybe yes, maybe no. After all Scalia and Ginsburg are two best friends on the Court (and so where f.ex. Justices Black and Harlan)

[RdhseRat]

She can always resign. No one is forcing her to be the lone "woman" on the court.

[muawiyah]

You'll have to check with Robert Mugabe on that one. He's one of the foreign legal sources several of the Justices seem to prefer.

[MozarkDawg]

"I have a list of highly qualified women, but the president has not consulted me," Ginsburg said during a brief interview Wednesday night.

Good comeback. I'm sorry Ruth, this is coming as a surprise to you? Don't know your Constitution then, eh? My copy says the SENATE shall advise and consent, not already-sitting justices. BA-ROTH-ER!!! Dingbat Alert.