The Left turns on one of its own pressing Justice Ginsburg to retire

Ruth Bader Ginsburg - File image
Ruth Bader Ginsburg - File image

LOS ANGELES, April 17, 2014 — American liberals have turned on one of their own.  In a delicious irony, one of the judges who upheld the constitutionality of Obamacare, including the ushering out of the elderly via bureaucratic “death panels” may become one of its most famous victims.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been a champion of liberal causes during her time on the bench. A former ACLU lawyer, Ginsburg faithfully toes the liberal line. She has even said that she consults international legal documents beyond the United States Constitution when considering her rulings.

Her reward for being a lifelong leftist is the death sentence being placed on her career by her leftist friends. A death sentence based on nothing more than her age and life line.

New Republic writes:

And, of course, she has been a Supreme Court justice for more than 20 years, only the second woman on the highest court, where she has been a stalwart liberal vote. A few months ago, she became the first justice to officiate a same-sex marriage. Evidence early this year from her dissent in a case that ended up neutering the Voting Rights Act suggests that, at 80, she’s still got it: “Just as buildings in California have a greater need to be earthquake­ proofed, places where there is greater racial polarization in voting have a greater need for prophylactic measures to prevent purposeful race discrimination,” she noted

So it pains me to say the following things. First: she is dead wrong about something big. And the big thing she is wrong about is insisting that she should not consider retiring soon, while she knows that a Democratic president and a Democratic-leaning Senate will be in-charge of replacing her. Which brings us to the second thing: she should retire soon.

The left is playing a strategic game: They want to force Ginsburg into retirement from the federal bench. Ginsburg is elderly and not in the best of health. If she retires now, President Obama will nominate a nominee every bit as ideologically leftist as Ginsburg. But one far younger.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can force that nominee through on a straight party-line vote due to his abolishing the filibuster. If Ginsburg waits until after the 2014 elections, Republican control of the Senate could force Obama to pick a nominee slightly to the right of Trotsky.

If Republicans win the White House in 2016, Ginsburg’s replacement will be a Republican.

From a liberal point of view, the strategy makes sense. The problem for the left is that Ginsburg does not want to retire. We can assume that she enjoys the dignity that comes with working and earning a paycheck, because many people do enjoy that validity.

Liberals will claim that their thinking is bipartisan. After all, conservatives would pressure an elderly conservative justice to retire if a Republican were president.


What liberals fail to understand is that conservatives value human life.  We are not willing to get rid of our precious human capital just to score political points.

For many liberals, Ginsburg is just a replaceable part, a cog in a machine, a means to an end. Winning at all costs sacrifices the very humanity of mere expendables. People are reduced to chessboard pawns, even powerful ones on the Supreme Court.

Conservatives intensely dislike most of Ginsburg’s rulings. Her legal reasoning is frequently at odds with the Constitution she is supposed to faithfully uphold. She is an activist judge who legislates from the bench, with destructive results.

Most conservatives would love to see her leave the bench. They are just not willing to corrupt their souls by throwing momma from the train.

Decent human beings understand this. And Justic Stephen Breyer, aged 75 — be careful. You’re next.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Communities Digital News

• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.

  • JWPicht

    Three points. First, liberals are divided on this. Quite a few think it would be a bad idea to pressure Ginsburg to leave, and they can’t force her to go. To make the ideological argument would be and open admission that liberals like Ginsburg decide cases on ideology, not the merits, and that a liberal justice is reliably liberal.

    Second, while Reid got rid of the filibuster, it we retained for one type of appointment: the selection of a Supreme Court justice. The Democrats could of course eliminate that exception, but they would probably be concerned about the political fallout of eliminating it as soon as Ginsburg retired. That would be unusually open partisanship even for Harry Reid, and it would be a potent tool for Republicans right before the 2014 elections. I don’t see Reid wanting to sacrifice his position as leader of the Senate to ensure that another liberal be put on the court. Liberals are known for sacrificing other people, not for being self-sacrificing.

    Third, given some Republican nominees to the court (Warren, Souter and Stevens, for instance), the Democrats might have a much easier time getting a new liberal onto the court by waiting for a Republican president to nominate her.

  • JackMarino

    Ruthie will drink the hemlock for the glory of the cause of Obama

    • joeblow1984

      Obama or Billary might just hasten it and poison her. Look at Vincent Foster, oh that’s right, he’s dead.

  • Micky

    Pretty nifty for a bunch who 50 years ago wouldn’t trust anyone over thirty.
    Now they’re debating a Logans Run for some Soylent Green ?

  • anestat

    Justices don’t always vote the way their party thinks they should. Consider the disgraceful opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts on obamacare.