Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

They Said It! (Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Endorses Ginsburg Precedent)
Republican National Committee ^ | September 29, 2005

Posted on 09/29/2005 2:41:38 PM PDT by RWR8189

"[Justice Ginsburg] Said She Agreed With A Position Taken By Federal Judge John G. Roberts During His Confirmation Hearing To Replace The Late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist.  Roberts Invoked Ginsburg When He Refused To Speculate On How He Would Rule In Cases Before The Court." (Estes Thompson, "Justice Ginsburg Says She'd Prefer Another Woman On Court," The Associated Press, 9/29/05)

 



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: chiefjusticeroberts; confirmationhearings; ginsberg; ginsbergprecedent; gop; johnroberts; quotes; rnc; roberts; scotus; theysaidit

1 posted on 09/29/2005 2:44:03 PM PDT by RWR8189
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Haha, she just owned Schumer and company.


2 posted on 09/29/2005 2:47:37 PM PDT by zendari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Looks as though she made these statements on the same day Roberts was sworn in -- apparently she doesn't want to cross her new boss on his first day on the job.


3 posted on 09/29/2005 2:48:23 PM PDT by Salvey (ancest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Makes sense she would support her new boss......


4 posted on 09/29/2005 2:48:31 PM PDT by Ben Mugged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvey

Too bad the boss can't fire his employees (or at least some of them).


5 posted on 09/29/2005 2:55:52 PM PDT by Clump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

And what's the liklihood that Senate 'Rats will observe this?


6 posted on 09/29/2005 3:00:31 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (Jeanine Pirro for Senate, Hillary Clinton for Weight Watchers Spokeswoman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ImaGraftedBranch

For once, Ginsburg says something intelligible.


7 posted on 09/29/2005 3:10:10 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007 (We DARE Defend Our Rights [Alabama State Motto])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Finally a leftist judge agrees with me! /sarcasm


8 posted on 09/29/2005 3:12:30 PM PDT by rocksblues (I support the war on terror)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

What gets me is the idiot Senators that would even as the question. It shows that those Senators expect the SC to make law and they wanted to know beforehand how the Court would vote.


9 posted on 09/29/2005 3:24:09 PM PDT by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
What's The Reason For All The Capitals?
10 posted on 09/29/2005 3:24:09 PM PDT by TXnMA (Iraq & Afghanistan: Bush's "Bug-Zappers"...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Bump


11 posted on 09/29/2005 4:05:30 PM PDT by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

It may also be that the senators who are heavily financed by the abortion industry have to earn that blood money by making such a high-profile fight. Gotta keep the donors happy.


12 posted on 09/29/2005 4:20:29 PM PDT by GenXFreedomFighter (We smirked our way back for a second term!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: zendari

Let's just hope that the Republicans can use this to their advantage when the next one comes up. At least, Schumer and company will have to try to find a different reason to vote against Bush's nominee


13 posted on 09/29/2005 5:43:58 PM PDT by t2buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Long live the Ginsburg Standard.

Too bad it didn't start with Doug Ginsberg instead of Ruth Buzzy.


14 posted on 09/29/2005 5:45:19 PM PDT by NeoCaveman (Go Mike Pence, Operation Offset, and the Cleveland Indians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

The reason is, if these nominees do start giving specifics they will steer to decisions where they thinks things were decided wrongly and violated basic rules of interpretation AND are politically incorrect. It will make the sitting justices look like idiots if teh candidates can start dissecting their opinions in front of the world without anyone there to stop the bleeding.

Do you think they would have liked someone as slick as Roberts to have talked about eminent domain for an hour in front of the whole world??


15 posted on 10/02/2005 5:33:48 AM PDT by Rippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson