Posted on 07/14/2016 6:13:36 AM PDT by artichokegrower
When is the First Amendment not the First Amendment? Apparently, when a liberal U.S. Supreme Court justice exercises it to voice alarm at the possibility that Donald Trump might become the next president.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
I guess the brilliant Mr. Hubler doesn’t realize that RBG just disqualified herself from a whole host of potential cases that might reach the high court. If all the justices ran their mouths like that we wouldn’t have anyone to hear cases.
NYT and WAPO say different
Hillary Clinton as president would run roughshod over the "law" which Ginsburg supposedly represents. She would have NO restraints.
The MSM demonstrates that there is no lower limit to their stupidity..
When the ignorant idiotess retires, she can spout her silliness.
She wants to go to bed with the handsome Trump bit she knows she is too ugly so she is sexially harassing Trump by abusing her position of power under the color of authority and to try and get his attention because she is an obsessed dithering of egyptian mummy wrapped in black robes wearing those stupid ovrrsize drink cuasters as ties that she wanted to market in competition with Trump ties but she wastes a lot of time with vibrators that do nothing for her and what is really setting her off is that old lady smell she has that the other justices have been secretly complaing about.
She also needs to stay away from Thomas, he isn’t her little black toy baby who needs her mama sympathy and “love”.
She sure was and they sure were. She should just STFU.
Wrong question.
The question should be “When is Ginsburg going to speak out against the lawbreaker Hillary Clinton?”
She blatantly violated cannon 5 of the judicial cannons. She is not a judge — she is a political HACK!!
She is displaying exactly the kind of jurist that can be expected from Hitlery.
AND she just nullified herself, which this buffoon author does not understand.
When a normal citizen questions the possible biases or motivations of a judge. In that case he's shouted down and called all sorts of terrible things.
The author of this article is clearly not very intelligent.
Until she retires, never. She may have all the opinions she wants. As a justice, she is supposed to remain politically aloof in her decisions and pronouncements.
Back in the 1700's, people's life expectancies were much lower than today.
They thought that a SC justice, appointed in his/her late 50's or 60's would probably serve no more than about 10 years.
Now, turds like RBG live well into their 80's. Medical technology can keep people alive well beyond age 70.
I would propose an amendment - SC justices must be "re-approved" by the Senate every 10 years.
She has shown a complete lack of judicial prudence in her comments and in her “threat” to move to another country. And, the Sac Bee’s attempt to insert Hitlerian imagery into the minds of it’s readers is idiotic. Especially given that it is Trump’s opposition that more closely resembles the Brown Shirts (Matter) of the 1930’s.
This guy is too much of a dumbass to waste time arguing with him.
How can she be a “brilliant jurist” when how she is going to vote is known before any arguments are heard?
God forgive me, but it has always bugged me that Ginsburg had colon cancer and was saved at the age of 66 in 1999;then saved from pancreatic cancer in 2009 when she was 76.
My brother died of colon cancer in 1993 at the age of 52.
She was a Supreme Court justice and my brother was a career postman.
Yet this hateful Communist beeyotch beats two killer cancers and continues to kill America with her biased rulings.
I shouldn’t think this way, but I cannot help it.
She was never a good judge. She was Bill Clinton’s pay back to Planned Parenthood.
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.