U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg dies at age 87 from pancreatic cancer

By Lawrence Hurley and Andrew Chung

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg speaks during a reception where she was presented with an honorary doctoral degree at the University of Buffalo School of Law in Buffalo, New York, U.S., August 26, 2019. REUTERS/Lindsay DeDario

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a stalwart liberal on the U.S. Supreme Court since 1993, died on Friday at age 87, the court said, giving President Donald Trump a chance to expand its conservative majority with a third appointment at a time of deep divisions in America with a presidential election looming.

 

Ginsburg, a champion of women's rights who became an icon for American liberals, died at her home in Washington of complications from metastatic pancreatic cancer, the court said in a statement. She was surrounded by her family, the court said.

 

Her departure could dramatically alter the ideological balance of the court, which currently has a 5-4 conservative majority, by moving it further to the right.

 

"Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature," Chief Justice John Roberts said in a statement. "We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her - a tireless and resolute champion of justice."

 

Trump, seeking re-election on Nov. 3, already has appointed two conservatives to lifetime posts on the court, Neil Gorsuch in 2017 and Brett Kavanaugh in 2018. Supreme Court appointments require Senate confirmation, and Trump's fellow Republicans control the chamber.

 

Supreme Court justices, who receive lifetime appointments, play an enormous role in shaping U.S. policies on hot-button issues like abortion, LGBT rights, gun rights, religious liberty, the death penalty and presidential powers. For example, the court in 1973 legalized abortion nationwide - a decision that some conservatives are eager to overturn - and in 2015 allowed same-sex marriage across the United States.

 

Ginsburg, who rose from a working class upbringing in New York City's borough of Brooklyn and prevailed over systematic sexism in the legal ranks to become one of America's best-known jurists, was appointed to the Supreme Court by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1993. She provided key votes in landmark rulings securing equal rights for women, expanding gay rights and safeguarding abortion rights.

 

Ginsburg had experienced a series of health issues including bouts with pancreatic cancer in 2019 and lung cancer in 2018, a previous bout with pancreatic cancer in 2009 and colon cancer in 1999. She disclosed on July 17, 2020, that she had a recurrence of cancer.

 

Ginsburg was the oldest member of the court and the second-longest serving among its current justices behind Clarence Thomas. She was the second woman ever named to the court, after Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was appointed 12 years earlier.

 

CONFIRMATION BATTLE

 

The Senate confirmation battle over a Trump nominee to replace Ginsburg is likely to be fierce - at a time of social unrest in the United States during the coronavirus pandemic - though Democrats lack the votes to block him unless some Republican senators join them.

 

Trump, who as a presidential candidate in 2016 called on Ginsburg to resign after she criticized him in media interviews, will get a chance to reshape the court like no other president since Ronald Reagan, who made three appointments during his eight years in office in the 1980s, moving the court to the right.

 

Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have made moving the federal judiciary to the right a top priority.

Another Trump appointment would give the Supreme Court a 6-3 conservative majority, meaning that for the liberal justices to prevail in any case they would need to have two of the conservatives join them.

 

When conservative Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016, McConnell refused to allow the Senate to consider Democratic President Barack Obama's nominee to fill the vacancy, Merrick Garland, in an action with little precedent in U.S. history. While McConnell in 2016 said a Supreme Court nomination should not be taken up during an election year, in 2019 he made clear that the Senate would allow Trump, a fellow Republican, to fill an election-year vacancy, drawing Democratic accusations of hypocrisy.

 

Some liberal activists had urged Ginsburg to step down early in Obama's second term to allow him to appoint a younger liberal to replace her who could serve decades on the court.

 

Even with a conservative majority on the court, Trump came out on the losing end of several key rulings in June and July 2020, including decisions rejecting his claim of absolute presidential immunity from criminal investigation. With Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts playing a key role, the court also ruled against Trump in expanding LGBT rights, invalidating a restrictive Louisiana abortion law and blocking him from rescinding an immigration program created by Obama.

 

In choosing his Supreme Court nominees, Trump has selected from a list of candidates prepared by conservative judicial activists. During the 2016 campaign, Trump promised to appoint justices who would overturn the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide.

 

It would take about a month for Trump and Senate Republicans to pick and confirm a replaceent, said Daniel Epps, a law professor and former Supreme Court clerk.

 

"I would be surprised if the president and Senate Republicans don't try to fill the seat," said Epps, of Washington University School of Law. "They probably have the votes."

 

Trump will likely replace Ginsburg with another woman, Epps, said, and might use the opportunity to rally his base of social conservatives.

 

A private interment service will be held at Arlington National Cemetery, the court said, but did not specify a date.

 

(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-09-19

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

 

 

Two things:

 

1 - Its about to get really nasty in American politics. 

 

2 - Before anyone invokes the "McConnel Rule" and revisits history, the rule was that SC seats shouldn't be filled in an election year if the WH and the Senate are controlled by different parties. 

19 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

Two things:

 

1 - Its about to get really nasty in American politics. 

 

2 - Before anyone invokes the "McConnel Rule" and revisits history, the rule was that SC seats shouldn't be filled in an election year if the WH and the Senate are controlled by different parties. 

There was no rule, there was only McConnell abusing his power. His hypocrisy will be there for all to see now, but Trump supporters won't care. Big loss for the USA 

Edited September 19, 20205 yr by stevenl

11 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

Two things:

 

1 - Its about to get really nasty in American politics. 

 

2 - Before anyone invokes the "McConnel Rule" and revisits history, the rule was that SC seats shouldn't be filled in an election year if the WH and the Senate are controlled by different parties. 

That is a specious interpretation of the McConnell Rule.  I use the word "specious" only because I don't want this post deleted.

 

If the White House and Senate are controlled by different parties an appointment with a realistic chance of being confirmed could not be hyper-partisan.  By your interpretation of the rule only hyper-partisan appointments should be allowed during an election year.

 

The only silver lining to this is that it should definitely bring out the vote on both sides, but primarily on the side of the Democrats.

Edited September 19, 20205 yr by heybruce

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

There was no rule, there was only McConnell abusing his power. His hypocrisy will be there for all to see now, but Trump supporters won't care. 

 

And thats not true, you just want it to be true, even though its not. 

Rest in peace Mrs. Justice Ginsburg

 

Yes, it will get ugly and Amerivans should

- say good bye to womens abortion rights

- say good bye to voters rights for non-republicans

- say good bye to any humanitarian ideas like asylum

- say good buy to any notion of LGBTQ rights

 

America - the new Russia 4.0

2 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

And thats not true, you just want it to be true, even though its not. 

Please show where in the Constitution, established law, rules of order, or anywhere else that the "McConnell rule" is mentioned.

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

That is a BS interpretation of the McConnell Rule.

 

Not only is it precisely the exact interpretation of the McConnell rule, it is also different in this case because Obama was termed out, and Trump is the incumbent. 

It will be a character test for Trump, whether or not he will tweet about his nomination already this weekend or whether he will want for Mrs. Justice Ginsburg's funeral to end...

 

Wait... has he tweeted already while I wrote these lines?

No fan of RGBs opinions.  Also no personal hate for her or any of the judges.  She was tireless in her efforts for her beliefs.  RIP RGB.

 

As to the weird idea that suddenly rights for anyone are lost I guess the hyper-partison politicking is starting already.  Yes, Roe v Wade might face scrutiny but LGBT and voters rights for non-republicans are in no danger.  That is just far left hyperbole.

 

I have no idea what the norm is for replacement of a judge this close to an election.  But I am curious what is the LAW as defined in the constitution.  I guess in the next few days there will be hundreds of articles discussing the rights or not of Trump nominating a replacement before the election.

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Please show where in the Constitution, established law, rules of order, or anywhere else that the "McConnell rule" is mentioned.

 

Ok if you dont like it, then ignore it, because Republicans are gonna put someone in that seat regardless. 

 

Dont forget the absolute clown show that the democrats made of the Kavanaugh confirmation, then went and made one of the nastiest commentators of it the Democrat VP pick. 

 

In no way is this going to end well for anyone. 

 

Also the irony of you invoking "the constitution" "Established Law" and "rules of order" is not lost on me.  

Oh laud, let the political games begin!

29 minutes ago, heybruce said:

That is a specious interpretation of the McConnell Rule.  I use the word "specious" only because I don't want this post deleted.

 

If the White House and Senate are controlled by different parties an appointment with a realistic chance of being confirmed could not be hyper-partisan.  By your interpretation of the rule only hyper-partisan appointments should be allowed during an election year.

 

The only silver lining to this is that it should definitely bring out the vote on both sides, but primarily on the side of the Democrats.

 

22 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

Not only is it precisely the exact interpretation of the McConnell rule, it is also different in this case because Obama was termed out, and Trump is the incumbent. 

Have the integrity to reply to my complete post, not one edited down to an out of context sentence.

 

Wait, a Trump supporter showing integrity?  What was I thinking!

19 minutes ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

Ok if you dont like it, then ignore it, because Republicans are gonna put someone in that seat regardless. 

 

Dont forget the absolute clown show that the democrats made of the Kavanaugh confirmation, then went and made one of the nastiest commentators of it the Democrat VP pick. 

 

In no way is this going to end well for anyone. 

 

Also the irony of you invoking "the constitution" "Established Law" and "rules of order" is not lost on me.  

McDonnell ignoring his own made-up rule would be the height of hypocrisy, and I'm sure that is what will happen.

 

If you find irony in my referring to the constitution and established law, then you are truly living in your own fantasy world.  You can find nothing I've posted in this forum or anywhere else to support your fantasy.

27 minutes ago, jimmybcool said:

<snip>

I have no idea what the norm is for replacement of a judge this close to an election.  <snip>

Ask Mitch McConnell. But please remember to mention if the person doing the appointment is a Democrat or Republican.

 

It is clear you're justifying to yourself your partisan opinion

Edited September 19, 20205 yr by stevenl

3 minutes ago, Swiss1960 said:

Trump's puppet McConnell already announced that the Senat will elect whomever Trump will present - probably could be Miss Piggy...

Definitely not Miss Piggy.  The obese Trump doesn't approve of fat women.

Well, Biden just won. Why? The hypocrisy of the republican party not allowing Obama to nominate  candidate in a presidential year and the republican senate leader saying that he will allow it.

 

Stunning. RIP Notorious RBG. 

34 minutes ago, Swiss1960 said:

It will be a character test for Trump, whether or not he will tweet about his nomination already this weekend or whether he will want for Mrs. Justice Ginsburg's funeral to end...

 

Wait... has he tweeted already while I wrote these lines?

Schummer already did 1 hour ago he beat Mr. Trump. She's not even buried 

 

Edited September 19, 20205 yr by riclag

37 minutes ago, Swiss1960 said:

Rest in peace Mrs. Justice Ginsburg

 

Yes, it will get ugly and Amerivans should

- say good bye to womens abortion rights

- say good bye to voters rights for non-republicans

- say good bye to any humanitarian ideas like asylum

- say good buy to any notion of LGBTQ rights

 

America - the new Russia 4.0

No...eventually Russia 1.0 before the revolution....heading down the path that all great societies eventually travel

Hail and farewell a great American.

On the political side of things I hope this sad news of a brave and intelligent lady passing away energises the democrat voters as much or more than the republican voters. 

27 minutes ago, heybruce said:

McDonnell ignoring his own made-up rule would be the height of hypocrisy, and I'm sure that is what will happen.

 

Its only hypocritical to you guys who revisit history and change the situation to fit what's politically expedient. 

 

Your interpretation of "in an election year" is not true and incomplete, but no doubt you guys will keep on regurgitating it constantly

Rip RBG you were a courageous pioneer in women’s jurisprudence you will be missed of course the republicans will try to get another far right judge appointed it’s absolutely no surprise they will be absolute hypocrates that shouldn’t surprise anyone I belive it will cement the popular vote in Biden’s favor (probably is anyway)but on the flip side when trump try’s to steal the election it will help him get away with it 

1 minute ago, Mama Noodle said:

 

Its only hypocritical to you guys who revisit history and change the situation to fit what's politically expedient. 

 

Your interpretation of "in an election year" is not true and incomplete, but no doubt you guys will keep on regurgitating it constantly

Please explain why there is nothing hypocritical about McConnell and the Republicans rushing to nominate and approve a Supreme Court Justice less than two months before the election, when they refused to do so for nine months before the 2016 election.

 

This should be entertaining.

10 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Hail and farewell a great American.

On the political side of things I hope this sad news of a brave and intelligent lady passing away energises the democrat voters as much or more than the republican voters. 

I thought about that SCJ !  Right now SCJ last a life time, POTUS come and go! If McConnel and the gop can get another judge in !I can die knowing my countries constitution will last for decades to come

 

RIP RBG

Edited September 19, 20205 yr by riclag

If there is a God, now would be an excellent time to "help America"!

 

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Please explain why there is nothing hypocritical about McConnell and the Republicans rushing to nominate and approve a Supreme Court Justice less than two months before the election, when they refused to do so for nine months before the 2016 election.

 

This should be entertaining.

 

Because the reason it was held up last time is that Obama was on his way out, completing 2 full terms, and the Senate and WH were controlled by different parties. 

This time, Trump is an incumbent running for re-election and the senate and WH are controlled by the same party. 

 

It was not a simple matter of "in an election year" it was stinging in a seat while you're on your way out, completing 2 terms. 

 

Those are the facts amigo, you may not like it, it may upset you, but thats your problem. 

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

I thought about that SCJ !  Right now SCJ last a life time, POTUS come and go! If McConnel and the gop can get another judge in !I can die knowing my countries constitution will last for decades to come

Trump uses the document you mentioned as tp but I think you know that hummmm.........

2 minutes ago, The Barmbeker said:

If there is a God, now would be an excellent time to "help America"!

 

 Some religious people believe God just did !

Just now, Tug said:

Trump uses the document you mentioned as tp but I think you know that hummmm.........

You know what TUG I have no idea what tp is

The Democrats will contest the election so best to get SCOTUS up to full strength