For the full article I am discussing, click on the link above. If you want to fully understand what I am critiquing, you should read it so I don’t have to quote too much from it! And yes, I do “Press” a lot of things I find on Huffpost.
A little background on RGB:
Ruth Bader Ginsberg has been seated on the Supreme Court since Bill Clinton appointed her in 1993. Before that, she rose through the ranks through sheer force of her intelligence and determination. She had to hurtle some very sexist people to get to this highest position, and is generally praised for being a progressive champion of women’s rights throughout her tenure there. She is also famous for her biting dissent statements of certain controversial SCOTUS decisions. They are a pleasure to read.
“Justice Ginsburg is not going to win a battle of insults with Donald Trump, and progressives cannot afford to give up the firewall of an independent judiciary as protection against the worst impulses and excesses of our politics. Progressives do not want to live in a world where we have completely erased the line between politicians and judges.”
-Steve Sanders, nervous Constitutional law professor
However, many are criticizing Ginsberg for speaking out against Trump, fearing that the whiff of partiality in a Supreme Court judge is enough to somehow undermine the entire institution. Hardly.
I submit that (by Sanders’ in admission) the Supreme Court has been for too beneficial to conservative causes and has too much potential to do so in the future. Many have expressed anger at the unelected status of Constitutional law judges, but generally only when the decisions have not been going their way.
Progressives are defending her comments by the old “desperate times call for desperate measures” justification. I tend to agree. Although this article and story are a bit stale, we can see after a few months that few in power possessing the gravitas and experience of Ginsberg have quite said enough. The media has been entirely remiss in checking the leaks in Trump’s completely fictional persona, autobiographical proclamations, and mendacious business practices. Also he’s a child rapist.
The first election I remember was Regan’s second campaign in 1984. Shortly thereafter my male relatives began listening to a radio host named Rush Limbaugh. Then, as Fox news gained ascendancy in the mainstream media, I noticed we didn’t talk about politics in quite the same way anymore. It would’ve been helpful if other TV news organizations were better at debunking, and directly, the Ailes-constructed propaganda machine, but Jon Stewart was largely alone, freed by his “unofficial newsman” status.
Now, after the appointment of a sexually abusive judge in 1991 (who has wisely clammed up for the rest of his tenure) and the slow erosion of Constitutional rights at the state level, a smart guy is worried about a judge who makes a few comments directed at a demagogue and dangerous strongman who has revitalized the darkest philosophies and misunderstandings in the American consciousness, that this will be enough to topple the last bastion of civil power in a hugely rigged system of policy-making.
Stop your hand-wringing, madame. I still think the Supreme court will be around tomorrow because if I have learned one thing being an American political spectator for 30 years, is that we seldom change very much at all.