Ask, and 'ye shall receive.
Posted on 01/16/2019 9:49:37 AM PST by SMGFan
Nothing! History is full of Supreme Court justices who were incapacitated—or worse. That’s the price of life tenure, and it’s worth paying.
(later in article) The history of cognitive decline on the high court teaches two lessons. First, there is a real risk of a substantial time lag between the onset of mental deterioration and a justice’s retirement. But second, and as important, this is a risk that can be contained. No justice—no matter how deranged—can do serious doctrinal damage without the acquiescence of at least half his colleagues. And when a justice is so utterly incapacitated that he is unable to break 4-4 ties, the court can continue to function with an even number of active members. Originally, the court had only six justices; during the Civil War, it had 10; and it has functioned fine with eight members during prolonged vacancies. Indeed, there are notable virtues to having an even number of justices—one of them being that it then takes more than a knife’s-edge majority to overturn a lower court decision or strike down a law nationwide.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
If she was an honest and responsible justice who took her Constitution oath seriously, she would resign. But she’s a modern democrat and will do the opposite.
Ask, and 'ye shall receive.
Yes how do we know that it is actually RBG writing opinions?
With Roberts cooperation she has already laid the groundwork for submitting her ghost written opinions without attending oral sessions or being seen in court or anywhere else:
"Ginsburg is working from home, according to a court spokeswoman. Roberts said she will participate in the two cases that were scheduled for argument by reading briefs, filings and a transcript of the sessions." Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg misses Supreme Court arguments for first time...
From he semi-comatose appearance in public, her opinions have probably been entirely written by her clerk for a while - but at least she made her court appearance to confirm that she was still alive.
Remember the NJ Senator (who screwed gun owners with his Lautenberg Amendment) he was on the Senate roles long after he totally disappeared from public view.
A common garden variety jury member can be kicked off a jury for falling asleep during a trial.
But we have to put up with Ruth Buzzy even though she’s not going to work, and when she is at work, she’s asleep at least half of the time.
Incredible.
what drugs is she taking?
She will continue until she assumes room temperature with her opinions being written by clerks. I’m sure the Democrat strategy is to keep her going until 2020 and then invoke the precedent that nominations should not be made in a presidential election year. At this point it is a race between the Grim Reaper and the calendar turning 2020. I’m betting on the Grim Reaper.
Is refusing to free up the seat in the face of terminal illness considered to be good behavior?
Is it even any "behavior" at all if she can't even show up?
-PJ
Nothing, unless she decides to leave.
Indeed, there are notable virtues to having an even number of justices—one of them being that it then takes more than a knife’s-edge majority to overturn a lower court decision or strike down a law nationwide.
Journalists! In either case it only takes a majority of ONE!
Maroons!
She hasn’t driven herself in years.
A majority of one is not possible if all vote. The only 10 vote possible majorities are only 6-4, 7-3, 8-2, 9-1 & 10-0
Impeachment is the only way to remove a sitting USSC judge, and I can’t see the congresscritters doing that, even if she were to completely lose her faculties.....
Now, mind you, I do not subscribe to the theory that Justice Ginsburg is Senile, other than the fact she embraces leftist stupidity as her legal world view... but she is in control of her faculties. She’s just physically frail.
As long as she breathes and can think she can do a Star Trek Captain Pike setting off blinking lights.
If she becomes too incapacitated, we should boycott Gillette for their recent ad.
Absences will be excused if she brings in a note from her parents ...
Yes, in a ten vote court, in an eight member court
it would only take one.
From the internet.
Originally, George Washington personally appointed six justices to the court. Because the number was even, votes had to be made by a 4-2 margin in order to be settled as law.
One judge should not be able to be the deciding vote,
it should take at least two.
Just my take.
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.