Justice Ginsburg Says She Won’t Retire Before 2012; Hints She May Stay Until 2016

CNSNews ^ | February 4, 2011 | Nicholas Ballasy

[jazusamo]

(CNSNews.com) -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said on Thursday evening that she will not retire from the court before 2012 and hinted that she might serve until she's at least 83 years old in 2016.

VIDEO 1:57 minutes

Ginsburg was interviewed by NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg at the Lisner Auditorium at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The topic of the discussion was Ginsburg's life before and after becoming a Supreme Court justice.

“I am constantly asked, ‘Is Justice Ginsburg going to retire soon?’" Totenberg asked. "So, I will ask you that. Do you have any plans for your retirement?”

Ginsburg, who was born on March 15, 1933, will turn 78 next month. “I will give the answer that I just gave to you, Nina, a few moments ago," Ginsburg said. "One of the nice perks about this job is that we get to choose paintings from the storage supply of the National Gallery, the Museum of American Art, the Hirshhorn.

Supreme Court Associate
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

“I had a wonderful painting from the Museum of American Art by Josef Albers,” said Ginsburg. “It was taken away for a traveling exhibition and I’m told that it will come back to me sometime in 2012. So I am certainly not going to retire before I get my Albers back. Another answer I can give you is I was appointed at age 60, the same age that Louis Bidenz Brandeis was when he was appointed the court. He stayed until he was 83. So I do have a way to go.”

Ginsburg will be 83 on March 15, 2016. (Louis Brandeis retired from the Court at the age of 83 in 1939.)

President Barack Obama, who will be standing for reelection in 2012, has so far filled two vacancies on the Supreme Court, appointing Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.

Last year, during the confirmation process for Justice Kagan, U.S. News and World Report published a piece on "rumors" that Justice Ginsburg might soon retire, and noted the recent death of her husband and her own bout with cancer. "While the court won't comment on the rumors, indications are that she might be looking to leave soon because of the recent death of her husband and also because of her own health issues," said U.S. News and World Report. "She recently underwent chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer."

[parisa]

A known known would be better than a known unknown!

[MissMagnolia]

If she has to be ‘stuffed like Trigger’ to make it until we have a conservative president to nominate her replacement, then I’m all for it.

[Venturer]

She is already stuufed. I won’t say with what, I would get banned.

[LucyT]

[proudpapa]

The last thing Obama and the dems will want is to go thru the nomination-approval Senate circus right before the 2012 elections.

For that very reason, I suspect Ginsburg will retire before this year is over.

OTOH, I’d be willing to give her the Josef Albers painting if she can hang on until 2013!

[jazusamo]

Good point.

Courtrooms are boring, they’re not like court scenes in TV shows.

[RummyChick]

In the Nguyen case she said her grandson, born in Paris, is a natural born citizen.

[numberonepal]

Perhaps a mandatory retirement age for Justices????

Two words: Term Limits.

[Califreak]

Yes.

Zero would probably replace her with someone who would want to help implement sharia law.

[bgill]

It would be good if Obama isn't there to nominate her successor.

That was my first thought as well.

[numberonepal]

Josef Albers???? Really? This is a true insight to this commie’s vision of the world. What crap. It’s worse than Pollock. That ain’t art.

[numberonepal]

And her taste in art sucks.

GMTA. See 51.

[so_real]

Never underestimate the propensity for liberals to eat their own. The liberals want to replace her for a newer model while they still can --- because they know 2012 isn't going their way. I still hope to have Obama labeled the usurper he his so we can have a do-over on the two appointees he's already made.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

There needs to be a major judicial reform. Article III of the Constitution just lays out that there must be a SCOTUS, and that congress can create other federal courts as it sees fit.

Right now there is a huge bottleneck in cases from the federal district courts to the Supreme Court. Some 8,000 cases a year, of which the SCOTUS can only hear a few dozen. All the rest, no matter how worthy, are returned to the federal district courts for a final decision.

Much of this problem is not in divining the constitutionality of issues, but in the ability of any federal judge to “federalize” local and State laws, because he finds them interesting, and can see a constitutional angle to them.

While there is indeed value and importance in doing so, there is no body to intercede and say to the federal judiciary, “No, this is a local and State, not a federal matter”; who will take it from them, after they have examined it for constitutional issues, in care there actually are some, and if not, to return these cases to the State and local level.

Thus there is a continual growth of federal judicial power, alongside of legislative and executive power, with no body or mechanism to trim it, short of a constitutional convention.

So a way to do this is for a constitutional *amendment* to create a Second Court of the United States. *Not* a federal court, but a body modeled after the original US senate. 100 State judges, appointed by their legislatures, each judge with a six year term parallel to one of their two senators.

There would be two purposes to this Second Court of the United States. Unlike federal courts that determine if laws and cases are constitutional, they would decide, after lower courts had reviewed cases for their constitutionality, whether those cases should remain in federal jurisdiction, or be returned to the State and local level for decision.

If a simple majority decided that they should, only the SCOTUS could overturn their decision. And if a 2/3rds majority decided this way, the law or case could not be appealed further.

In any event, since the SCOTUS could still only hear a few dozen cases, the rest of these 8,000 cases would be returned for the decision of the Second Court of the United States. Then, only if they agreed these were federal cases, would they be returned for a district court decision. Otherwise, they would be returned to the States, and would no longer be federal cases.

The *other* thing for the Second Court of the United States to do would be to have original jurisdiction in cases involving lawsuits between States, and between States and the federal government.

That is, for example, with the Justice Department suing Arizona over its SB 1070 law, it would *first* be up to the other 49 States to decide who is right.

This also means that States could sue the federal government for every law, regulation, executive order, judicial precedent, etc., foisted on them, and if the other States agreed, whatever it was would stop having federal authority.

In effect giving the States the right of nullification, and the ability to trim the size and authority of the federal government. Executive, legislative and judicial branches.

A necessary thing, since the federal government has proven both unwilling, and perhaps unable, to reduce its own size and authority. So somebody has to do it for them.

[Libloather]

Just a few tablespoons in the morning coffee...

[668 - Neighbor of the Beast]

She’s lying. If she thinks a Republican is about to win in 2012, she’ll retire instantly.

[sinanju]

Even worse. More likely she has NO taste in art and only goes with what’s trendy. I’m sure she would have gone with a crying clown painting if that’s what the Clement Greenbergs and the Great and Good of the period were lauding.

[jazusamo]

Interesting thoughts. It looks like it would be especially effective in the limiting of states rights by the feds and that’s needed badly. Thanks.

[steve8714]

She’d never go to Branson any other way.

[Hulka]

She's 78?!

Goodness. . I honestly thought she must be around late 80’s to 90.

Truly, I did, because of the way she looks, apparently disconnected from reality, falling asleep all the time, no sense of “presence” in anything in any venue. A frail old woman devoid of reality.

Weekend at Bernie's?