Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump told Fox News’ Bret Baier in an interview Wednesday that he questions Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s mental capacity.
Advertisement
U.S. Supreme Court justices nearly never voice their opinions about U.S. political campaigns, adhering to long-standing legal ethical standards against such commentary and because they could be called on to help decide an election, as occurred in 2000. I hate to admit that Trump might be right, but the justice should have kept her opinions to herself on this one, given her position. “I can’t imagine what this place would be-I can’t imagine what the country would be-with Donald Trump as our president”, she said. For the country it would be four years. “For the court, it would be – I don’t even want to contemplate that”.
Others rushed to the 83-year-old justice’s defense. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment”, said the Brooklyn-born justice, a petite but tough-as-nails figure who has earned the nickname “Notorious RBG”-a play on the stage name of the late rapper Notorious BIG”.
She added, “He really has an ego”.
Trump called on Ginsburg to resign early Wednesday morning over the comments.
In a later interview with the New York Times, Ginsburg took the jabs a step further, declaring that Trump “has no consistency about him”, and is a “faker,” before making her remarks about moving out of the country.
In Trump’s favor, Ginsburg would probably have to recuse herself should the Trump University lawsuit ever make it all the way to the Supreme Court. She should resign from the Court before she does the reputation of the judiciary more harm.
The Supreme Court, whose nine justices are nominated by the U.S. president to lifetime appointments, is in the spotlight this presidential election cycle after Scalia’s death. Reid emphasized Senate Republicans’ refusal to consider President Barack Obama’s choice to fill an open seat, Merrick Garland.
“The First Amendment is based on the strong presumption that more speech is beneficial because it means we are all better informed”, he writes. I think she should apologise to the court. “Because we’re already suspicious about the way the Supreme Court is going”. But in the court term just ended, the court often philosophically split 4-4.
Advertisement
While Ginsburg’s remarks were relatively tame in an era of hyper-partisanship, experts in legal ethics told AP that she likely ran afoul of Canon 5 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which says a federal judge “should not. publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office”. She leveled her complaints at Trump’s character more than anything – certainly not against the legal framework for any potential policy decision by a Trump administration that might end up before the court.
