[artichokegrower]

I see in Ginsburg a brilliant jurist who, as an American Jew born in 1933, saw what happens when good people don’t question the rise of a bigoted, authoritarian mindset.

Enough with the Trump is Hitler already.

[refermech]

She can run her mouth all she wants when she retires.

[goldstategop]

Ruth Ginsburg was out of place - a judge must be impartial, non-political and above perception of bias.

Her remarks were completely inappropriate.

[Road Warrior ‘04]

If not now, when should Justice Ginsburg have spoken out on Trump?

Never would be a good start!

[JPJones]

“When is the First Amendment not the First Amendment? “

When you’re a Supreme Court Justice and are supposed to be impartial.

[Lent]

Ah the ‘spectre’! Hidden in the shadows of 1933 Germany. Lame.

[gr8eman]

“I see in Ginsburg a brilliant jurist who, as an American Jew born in 1933, saw what happens when good people don’t question the rise of a bigoted, authoritarian mindset.”...Says the authoritarian bigots!

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

How about “never”? Or is there some far more complex answer we should be struggling with?

[utahagen]

Do people even understand what the First Amendment is? No one is disputing Justice Ginsburg's legal “right” to say whatever she want to; the issue is whether her particular position warrants her to keep her bloody mouth shut when it comes to politics. If an elementary school teacher were to get up in front of the whole school, point to a particular student, and say, “That kid's a dope”, there would be idiots who would argue that the teacher had a First Amendment right to have done so. Argh!

[Blood of Tyrants]

By her comments she just announced that she is biased against Trump in any lawsuit that comes up to the SC. Not that we already didn’t know she was biased.

[Hostage]

If Ginsberg is so against the millions of voters who support Donald Trump, perhaps she should run for President herself or be picked up by the Hillary group as VP.

Does she have 1st Amendment rights? Sure she does. She also has the corresponding obligation to recuse herself in cases where she has previously revealed her bias in public.

Ginsberg is a prime example of why judges should be term limited or allowed to be dismissed by voter referendum.

[JLAGRAYFOX]

She is worse then Hitler...she should resign...she can no longer judge anything...objectively!!! Talk about Nazi & Facist lunatics....she belongs right in there with them!!! What a low life witch. She and Hillary Clinton.....fine examples of human vermin...right along with Kenyan, Barack Hussein Obama!!!

[winner3000]

I support Ginsburgh’s right to speak. I hope she should continue to do so. That’s why even the NY Times want her to shut up. They don’t want people to realize how partisan Ginsburgh is. It’s much better for Conservatives to show the world why the liberal Justices vote consistently the same way all the time. So much for the impartiality of justice!

[Palio di Siena]

she is free to express whatever views she likes, as long as she is prepared to recuse herself from ruling on any matters about which she has expressed an opinion.
now we all know she wont recuse herself, so in this case the answer is never.

[elcid1970]

The SacBee is so predictable. What if Clarence Thomas had denounced Hillary in similar terms?

[ripnbang]

She’s a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. If she wants to speak out about a candidate for president, good or bad, resign the position and join the rally/protest marches, otherwise do your job and speak only on legal topics in an official capacity.

[Gaffer]

Just because she is Jewish and born in pre-war America doesn’t entitle her to the ‘Holocaust badge’ when giving/taking special license to complain, IMO.

She is a rabid liberal appointed by a scoundrel President. She is senile, IMO.

[Dr. Sivana]

When is the First Amendment not the First Amendment?

If the lowest grunt in the U.S. military is not supposed to disparage his commander-in-chief publicly?

If a religious entity, or any non-profit's spokesman wants to denounce a candidate by name, should the entity's tax status be threatened?

The justices should violate decorum, or what's left of it, when these other restrictions on free political speech are removed.

[pb929]

I guess the brilliant Mr. Hubler doesn’t realize that RBG just disqualified herself from a whole host of potential cases that might reach the high court. If all the justices ran their mouths like that we wouldn’t have anyone to hear cases.

[Donglalinger]

NYT and WAPO say different

[kiryandil]

Why isn't Shawn Hubler wondering why Ginsburg hasn't spoken out about the possibility of an unprosecuted, unrepentant serial felon becoming president?

Hillary Clinton as president would run roughshod over the "law" which Ginsburg supposedly represents. She would have NO restraints.