Ginsburg apologizes for “ill-advised” criticism of Trump

Trump said that Ginsburg should resign (which she won’t, nor has any reason to do); that she is “dumb”; that “her mind is shot”; and that she is a “disgrace” (an insult he has so overused to characterize his political adversaries that it has become a cliché).

KGVO New reached out to a regular guest on the talk Back show, Rob Natelson, Constitutional Fellow with the Independence Institute in Denver, Colorado.

But she shouldn’t have apologized for what she said about Trump.

Those comments brought criticism and questions over judicial ethics even from Democrats, who said Supreme Court justices should not insert themselves into the elections. “Abe Fortas was a cronie of Lyndon Johnson, and of course, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who was Justice Ginsburg’s best friend on the court, was very outspoken on issues”.

On the issue of a Trump presidency, the Supreme Court judge told the Associated Press last week: “I don’t want to think about that possibility, but if it should be, then everything is up for grabs”.

Natelson said, since there is no real governing body over the U.S. Supreme Court, the court itself would have to step in in such a situation.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Thursday that she should not have commented on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and she regrets her remarks. “Judges”, she said, “should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office”.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, on Thursday called Ginsburg’s original comments “beyond the pale and not called for”. When a member of the court strides into that muck, she may help a candidate, but she hurts the cause of justice. The opinions expressed in this commentary are exclusively those of the author.

Ginsburg was appointed to the high court by President Bill Clinton in 1993, and is now the senior member of the liberal wing and leading voice countering conservative Chief Justice Roberts. It would also encourage justices to let their political biases affect, if not determine, their decisions.

In an interview with the New York Times on Sunday, the jurist suggested she may emigrate in the event of a Trump victory.

Ginsburg has apparently heeded their advice, and she’s stopped the name-calling. For justices to descend into partisan election campaigns would undermine public faith in their willingness to assess each case strictly on its legal merits. “She would decide the motion herself, however, and it seems likely that this retraction would lead her to reject it”, said Northwestern University law professor Steven Lubet.

“If she’s apologized, she’s apologized for saying publicly what she believes”, Hellman said. “Her comment today doesn’t change that”, he said.