Her comments were met with a wave of alarm by many judicial ethics experts, who called them surprising if not potentially recusal-worthy should a legal issue involving Trump come before the court.
Advertisement
Ginsburg, 83, also lambasted Trump in a separate newspaper interview. She’s called him a fake! “He says whatever comes into his head at the moment”, said the Brooklyn-born justice, a diminutive but tough-as-nails figure who has earned the nickname “Notorious RBG”. Ginsburg also criticized Trump for not making his recent tax returns public.
Earlier in the week, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was interviewed by CNN, and gave her thoughts on the billionaire real estate mogul.
The editorial boards of The Washington Post and The New York Times rebuked Ginsburg in editorials today, with the Post calling her remarks inappropriate and the Times writing that she should drop the name-calling. She added, “For the country, it could be four years”.
It’s no secret that Supreme Court justices have their presidential preferences, but should they be talking about them out loud?
The Republican-controlled US Senate has refused to take up Democratic President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace Mr Scalia, Merrick Garland.
Trump called Ginsburg’s comment a “disgrace to the court”.
Justice Ginsburg made an observation regarding media coverage of the debate about Trump’s tax returns: “The press seems to be very gentle with him on that”.
Justice Ginsburg has a history of speaking her mind outside of the court.
When co-host Raven Symone suggested Ginsburg’s comments likely resonated among Americans similarly concerned about the prospect of a Trump presidency, Bure turned the argument around.
In ordinary times, it would be hard to defend Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s comments on Donald Trump.
Ginsberg started the row by telling AP in an interview the next president – “whoever she will be” – will have a bunch of appointments to make to the Supreme Court.
“A federal law requires all federal judges, including the justices, to recuse themselves if their ‘impartiality might reasonably be questioned, ‘” Stephen Gillers, a legal ethicist at New York University School of Law, told CNN. There’s a good reason the Code of Conduct for United States Judges flatly states that a “judge should not.?.?. publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office”.
Ryan said that someone in an appointed branch of government – and especially someone who will have to adjudicate cases in the future where the administration is a party – should not critique presidential candidates.
Advertisement
The Vermont senator declined to say whether it is appropriate for a sitting Supreme Court justice to openly criticise a White House contender. Their message is that Trump himself has crossed so many red lines and made so many statements which damage the country’s basic social fabric that they “understand” why she said it, even if they think her role as a justice should have stopped her from saying it.
