Ginsburg's public Trump critique raises ethical quandaries

[webfact]

Ginsburg's public Trump critique raises ethical quandaries
By MICHAEL BIESECKER

WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's public criticism of Donald Trump is dividing legal experts over whether the leader of the court's liberal wing should recuse herself in any future case involving him.

In an interview last week with The Associated Press, Ginsburg presumed Democrat Hillary Clinton will be the next president. Asked her thoughts on the possibility of a Trump win, she said, "I don't want to think about that possibility," and amplified her view in two subsequent interviews.

She called Trump a "faker" who "really has an ego," in a CNN interview. To the New York Times, she said: "I can't imagine what this place would be — I can't imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president."

Trump quickly fired back at Ginsburg, who was appointed to the high court in 1993 by his opponent's husband, former President Bill Clinton. He tweeted Wednesday that the 83-year-old justice was an embarrassment for making "very dumb political statements about me. Her mind is shot - resign!"

Other Republicans have chimed in, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who called Ginsburg's remarks "totally inappropriate."

"She oughta stay out of it," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R, Iowa). "It hurts the court when she does that."

While Ginsburg's remarks were relatively tame in an era of hyper-partisanship, experts in legal ethics told AP that she likely ran afoul of Canon 5 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which says a federal judge "should not . publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office."

"This is nothing casual," said Arthur D. Hellman, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. "The aim, I suppose, is to influence the election. ... If a lower-court judge had said those things, they would be subject to disciplinary proceeding."

But those rules aren't legally binding on Supreme Court justices, who as the highest ranking officials in the U.S. justice system are the final arbiters of their own legal ethics.

Ginsburg has been increasingly willing to publicly discuss issues involving the court. She has used media interviews to tamp down speculation about her retirement, especially after she had an operation for pancreatic cancer in 2009 and following the death of her husband the next year.

Ginsburg had previously said she expected a Democrat to win in 2016, meaning she could delay retiring because her replacement would be chosen by a member of that party. But before last week's comments about Trump, she had never dipped so boldly into partisan politics.

Stephen Gillers, professor at New York University School of Law, called Ginsburg's comments "imprudent." He pointed to a federal law that states, "Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

What if a situation were to arise this year like that in Bush v. Gore, the case in which the Supreme Court decided the outcome of the 2000 presidential election on a partisan 5-4 vote? Gillers said it is theoretically possible that Chief Justice John Roberts and the rest of Ginsburg's colleagues could vote to force her to recuse herself.

But in the long history of the precedent-bound Supreme Court, that has never happened, he said.

"The court defers routinely to the decision of the justice," he said. "If Ginsburg declined to recuse herself in such a case that would be the end of the story. The court will not review it."

Further, said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California-Irvine School of Law, it's not as if Ginsburg's political views are a surprise to anyone who has watched or read her opinions on the court for the last 22 years.

"Everyone knows she is a liberal Democrat," he said.

While it's the expectation these days that judges keep their political views private, Supreme Court members haven't always been divorced from partisan activities.

One hundred years ago, Charles Evans Hughes won the Republican presidential nomination on the third ballot at the party's national convention in Chicago, and only then resigned his Supreme Court seat.

Justice William Douglas regularly played cards with FDR. Justice Abe Fortas continued secretly advising President Lyndon Johnson after he put Fortas on the court in 1965. President Richard Nixon and Chief Justice Warren Burger met at the White House the spring night in 1970 Nixon told the nation U.S. forces had invaded Cambodia. Nixon later said he told Burger to be ready to run for president in 1972 if the public turned against Nixon.

President Barack Obama's spokesman on Wednesday declined to respond directly to Ginsburg's comments, but praised her overall competence.

"She has demonstrated a keen intellect, an understanding of the law, and a commitment to making sure it's applied fairly to every American citizen," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest.

___

Associated Press reporters Barbara Rodriguez in Des Moines, Iowa, and Josh Lederman in Washington contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-07-14

[OMGImInPattaya]

Scalia and Thomas have attended Koch Bros. Democrat bashing pow-wows so there's nothing to see here.

[Alive]

As if these judges are somehow free from bias, corruption and megalomania. By the way, from her picture she'd make a good candidate for the witched witch in the next Wizard of Oz.

[Boon Mee]

That old bag has just reclused herself.

What a fool...

[stevenl]

That old bag has just reclused herself.

What a fool...

All is OK, we have wise man Boon Meet to judge.

[charmonman]

Well, if there is another Bush v Gore scenario this year there will be a real problem because the court is missing a judge and might split evenly down the middle. This is of course because the Republican Senate refuses to even consider Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. So what then?

[Boon Mee]

Ethical Quandaries?

The old bag is senile...

[ggt]

"I can't imagine what this place would be — I can't imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president."

Let me help you out Justice Ginsburg...un-vetted illegals will not be flooding over the border...the Congress will once again operate as it should...the IRS will have to walk a straight line or lose their jobs...the VA career uncaring loafers will be looking for new work...foreign nations will know they will have to play by the rules of a treaty or suffer the consequences...1st responders will be promoted as indispensable pillars of the community and given the respect they are due...the US Justice Dept. will follow the rule of law and seek justice and indictments equally among all citizens...law and rules which suffocate small businesses will be abolished or diluted...just for starters...

The President will be a President and not a self-appointed self-absorbed political hack dictator...

Are these things so hard for you to imagine? It is the way the US was originally designed to function...not like our present administration which has chosen to ignore the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Rule of Law...

The consequences of a continuation of the Obama mis-administrations is to court domestic disaster...

The majority of people in the US have had quite enough...thank you...

Time for you Justice Ginsburg to retire...do not embarrass yourself or the Supreme Court in further...try keeping your mouth shut...

[Berkshire]

It's clear why Trump and his supporters are so offended by this---Ginsburg is absolutely correct in her assessment. And why the freak won't Trump release his tax returns???!!!

[Pinot]

Fat ugly wife of Clarence Thomas is a lobbyist for the tea baggers. She solicits donors for the Republican party and worked feverishly against the ACA.

Thomas has never recused himself from anything.

Ginsburg will not be recusing herself from anything and she shouldn't. She can say whatever she wants.

When you think back on all these pathetic right wing justices and what they have done over the last 20 years, the door is wide open for Ginsburg to say anything she wants...and good on her. She speaks the truth.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Pinot

[Pinot]

"I can't imagine what this place would be — I can't imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president."

Let me help you out Justice Ginsburg...un-vetted illegals will not be flooding over the border...the Congress will once again operate as it should...the IRS will have to walk a straight line or lose their jobs...the VA career uncaring loafers will be looking for new work...foreign nations will know they will have to play by the rules of a treaty or suffer the consequences...1st responders will be promoted as indispensable pillars of the community and given the respect they are due...the US Justice Dept. will follow the rule of law and seek justice and indictments equally among all citizens...law and rules which suffocate small businesses will be abolished or diluted...just for starters...

The President will be a President and not a self-appointed self-absorbed political hack dictator...

Are these things so hard for you to imagine? It is the way the US was originally designed to function...not like our present administration which has chosen to ignore the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Rule of Law...

The consequences of a continuation of the Obama mis-administrations is to court domestic disaster...

The majority of people in the US have had quite enough...thank you...

Time for you Justice Ginsburg to retire...do not embarrass yourself or the Supreme Court in further...try keeping your mouth shut...

"The majority of people in the US have had quite enough...thank you..." No, thank you!

The majority of what now? Hack dictator? Hack dictator???

The way the the US was designed to function...ye gods

Justice Ginsburg can say anything she wants.

[ggt]

"I can't imagine what this place would be — I can't imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president."

Let me help you out Justice Ginsburg...un-vetted illegals will not be flooding over the border...the Congress will once again operate as it should...the IRS will have to walk a straight line or lose their jobs...the VA career uncaring loafers will be looking for new work...foreign nations will know they will have to play by the rules of a treaty or suffer the consequences...1st responders will be promoted as indispensable pillars of the community and given the respect they are due...the US Justice Dept. will follow the rule of law and seek justice and indictments equally among all citizens...law and rules which suffocate small businesses will be abolished or diluted...just for starters...

The President will be a President and not a self-appointed self-absorbed political hack dictator...

Are these things so hard for you to imagine? It is the way the US was originally designed to function...not like our present administration which has chosen to ignore the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Rule of Law...

The consequences of a continuation of the Obama mis-administrations is to court domestic disaster...

The majority of people in the US have had quite enough...thank you...

Time for you Justice Ginsburg to retire...do not embarrass yourself or the Supreme Court in further...try keeping your mouth shut...

"The majority of people in the US have had quite enough...thank you..." No, thank you!

The majority of what now? Hack dictator? Hack dictator???

The way the the US was designed to function...ye gods

Justice Ginsburg can say anything she wants.

So can you sweetie...

[Berkshire]

It's clear why Trump and his supporters are so offended by this---Ginsburg is absolutely correct in her assessment. And why the freak won't Trump release his tax returns???!!!

Bernie agrees with me....

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trailguide-updates-sanders-sides-with-ginsburg-over-trump-1468415029-htmlstory.html

“I agree with what Justice Ginsburg said,” Sanders said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “I think that Trump is a total opportunist. … I do not believe anything that comes out of his mouth.”

[bkkcanuck8]

Ginsburg made a personal observation/comment of what she thought of Trump, and if a "personal" issue comes up in the court she should recuse herself (like screwing an intern and then breaking laws in a coverup).... but anything else... no she is fine. She did not give up her rights as a citizen to have personal opinions when she was appointed to the supreme court.

[mrwebb8825]

Ginsburg made a personal observation/comment of what she thought of Trump, and if a "personal" issue comes up in the court she should recuse herself (like screwing an intern and then breaking laws in a coverup).... but anything else... no she is fine. She did not give up her rights as a citizen to have personal opinions when she was appointed to the supreme court.

Um, YES, she DID. People of high office have a moral obligation NOT to dissuade or unduly influence regular citizens by publicly airing personal opinion. If you or I said the exact same thing, not only would it NOT make the news, but most people (outside of this forum) wouldn't care. BUT, when someone perceived as a "Leader" or a "Person of Great Influence" makes any kind of statement about anything, it makes a mark on the public, good or bad.

Look at the outcome of Obama making "bad judgement" comments about the police before all the facts were in. Look what happened (and IS happening) in the UK when Obama went over there before the Brexit vote to tell them what to do.

"With great power comes great responsibility"

[elgordo38]

The supreme court is so polarized its incredible. They could not come up with a decision that strays from the Republican/Democrat mantra. When they are appointed by a president they are told as much that they are in that president and his parties hip pocket. Just follow the script. Meaningful decisions my posterior.

Edited July 14, 2016 by elgordo38

[grumpyoldman]

Good for her, calls it as she sees it and everybody else can kiss her wrinkly derrier. Love her, reminds me of my Grandma, pulled no punches. "Kettle is black, got it(?) F****ing good", staunch ol Swiss lady from Wisconsin via Lausanne.

[ggt]

Good for her, calls it as she sees it and everybody else can kiss her wrinkly derrier. Love her, reminds me of my Grandma, pulled no punches. "Kettle is black, got it(?) F****ing good", staunch ol Swiss lady from Wisconsin via Lausanne.

Grumpyoldman supports tirade of grumpyoldwoman....could be alzheimers and dementia talking...

[dunroaming]

No reason why old timers can't stand for office. The motivation for my call for everyone over the age of sixty to be banned from voting is based on the reasons I have given. It tends to be that when we get older we tend to want things to go back to how they used to be. There is nothing more negative than that!

[Linzz]

Good for her, calls it as she sees it and everybody else can kiss her wrinkly derrier. Love her, reminds me of my Grandma, pulled no punches. "Kettle is black, got it(?) F****ing good", staunch ol Swiss lady from Wisconsin via Lausanne.

You should LOVE Trump in that case

[edko]

No such thingo r word as a "quandarie" so it follows that there can not be "quandaries". Please take note all of you for whom English is a second language, the correct word is quandry. If it was only a TVF responder I wouldn't be so trite, but this is a headline by someone who is receiving money to slay the English language.

Edited July 14, 2016 by edko

[DeaconJohn]

Ginsburg has apologized in a statement issued by the court.

[Jingthing]

Her comments about the horrible candidate trump were absolutely right but even though it is well known judges have political opinions, at that level she should not have expressed them.

What I find hilarious is when trump acts all outraged about any criticism when he himself is the most outrageously offensive politician imaginable. As many have noted he's a MAN BABY.

[Ulysses G.]

What I find hilarious is when trump acts all outraged about any criticism when he himself is the most outrageously offensive politician imaginable.

He is not a judge on THE SUPREME COURT. There is no legitimate comparison.

[bkkcanuck8]

What I find hilarious is when trump acts all outraged about any criticism when he himself is the most outrageously offensive politician imaginable.

He is not a judge on THE SUPREME COURT. There is no legitimate comparison.

Yes, no direct comparison.... he will be able to pick who runs the department of justice and how independent they are which makes final decisions on which cases should be pursued in major cases etc. But yeah, that is nothing....

[mrwebb8825]

No such thingo r word as a "quandarie" so it follows that there can not be "quandaries". Please take note all of you for whom English is a second language, the correct word is quandry. If it was only a TVF responder I wouldn't be so trite, but this is a headline by someone who is receiving money to slay the English language.

singular form:

quan·da·ry

ˈkwänd(ə)rē/

noun

1. a state of perplexity or uncertainty over what to do in a difficult situation.

   "Kate is in a quandary"

   synonyms: predicament, plight, difficult situation, awkward situation;

quan·da·ry

(kwŏn′də-rē, -drē)

n. pl. quan·da·ries

as it was used in the plural form, the spelling is indeed, correct.

Edited July 14, 2016 by mrwebb8825

[linksman00]

Well, if there is another Bush v Gore scenario this year there will be a real problem because the court is missing a judge and might split evenly down the middle. This is of course because the Republican Senate refuses to even consider Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. So what then?

As in any Supreme court deadlock decision, it would immediately revert to the lower court decision. Of course if you are referring to a tie in the electoral college, then it becomes very a straight forward constitutional issue, the incoming House of Representatives will choose the President from the top three vote getters and the Senate will choose the Vice President. I doubt this upcoming election will rest with the Supreme court, however if it did come to that then these foolish comments from Justice Ginsberg would weigh heavily in getting her to recuse herself from the decision.

[bkkcanuck8]

Well, if there is another Bush v Gore scenario this year there will be a real problem because the court is missing a judge and might split evenly down the middle. This is of course because the Republican Senate refuses to even consider Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court. So what then?

As in any Supreme court deadlock decision, it would immediately revert to the lower court decision. Of course if you are referring to a tie in the electoral college, then it becomes very a straight forward constitutional issue, the incoming House of Representatives will choose the President from the top three vote getters and the Senate will choose the Vice President. I doubt this upcoming election will rest with the Supreme court, however if it did come to that then these foolish comments from Justice Ginsberg would weigh heavily in getting her to recuse herself from the decision.

I thought there was already a vacancy - which may be the case at the time of the election.... so a recusal would actually mean 7 justices. I see no need for her to recuse herself though. Justice Scalia was more my type of appointment -- but he could be just as outspoken

When you have a written constitution, with a written set of rights -- it becomes important to not make judgements on what you think it should mean but actually what it means .... otherwise you are no longer a judge but a supreme legislator.... one that cannot be overruled by an act of parliament.

[MaxYakov]

What I find hilarious is when trump acts all outraged about any criticism when he himself is the most outrageously offensive politician imaginable.

He is not a judge on THE SUPREME COURT. There is no legitimate comparison.

Yes, no direct comparison.... he will be able to pick who runs the department of justice and how independent they are which makes final decisions on which cases should be pursued in major cases etc. But yeah, that is nothing....

We can only hope. Unless a one-party, leftist state is desired as it is by too many.

[Boon Mee]

It's clear why Trump and his supporters are so offended by this---Ginsburg is absolutely correct in her assessment. And why the freak won't Trump release his tax returns???!!!

Well, how come she's craw fishing her remarks if that assessment was so correct?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/us/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-donald-trump.html?_r=0