SCOTUS

[MDlaxfan76]

You can listen to oral arguments on C SPAN. If your bored and channel surfing late at night they have them on every so often. I have to my own embarrassment spent many hours listening to them. You do not get any video but you can listen to the judges questioning the lawyers arguing in front of them. Does the fact I disagree and dislike RBG equate to you speaking ill of the dead? What have I said about her since her passing that equates to ill will? If not jumping on the RBG lovefest wagon means I am disrespecting her, then so be it. If trump bit the farm tomorrow you would witness a whole new level of illl will towards the deceased.
FTR Scalia was also nasty and ornery towards any lawyer arguing in front of him that was not prepared to argue his/her case. I did not reach up my ass and pull this opinion out. I observed what I heard listening to oral arguments when they are on TV. I can tell you Justice Thomas has a wonderful demeanor during oral arguments. He never asks a single freaking question of any lawyer. That sure does speed up the process doesn't it?

Yes, you are right about delayed audio broadcasts of arguments. I was thinking about live broadcasts.

What have you said that equates to speaking ill of the dead?

"Nasty temperament."

"Very mean and short tempered."

"Grade A b*tch."

"Nasty nature."

The extreme nature of my response is due in large part to you misogynistic past comments about her looks. She's a woman, you find her unattractive, and she's a liberal. That is three strikes against her in your book.

You are correct, I have made fun of RBGs looks and demeanor in the past. I bet you damn near every progressive poster on this forum has said much more disparaging comments about Sarah Palin. Does that also make their comments misogynistic in nature? Maybe those insults and disparaging comments were different.? Explain to me what the rules are when it comes to misogynistic comments. I guess it matters what political party the person belongs to?

How about sharing with us what you think those misogynistic comments about Palin were?

You do realize that criticizing a woman is not necessarily misogynistic, right?

[njbill]

You are correct, I have made fun of RBGs looks and demeanor in the past. I bet you damn near every progressive poster on this forum has said much more disparaging comments about Sarah Palin. Does that also make their comments misogynistic in nature? Maybe those insults and disparaging comments were different.? Explain to me what the rules are when it comes to misogynistic comments. I guess it matters what political party the person belongs to?

I don't think people made negative comments about Palin's looks.

We can all look up the definition of misogynistic, but I think combining nasty (your word) remarks with negative comments about her looks seems to pretty squarely qualify to me.

To look at it another way, you can criticize, or disagree with, her opinions and positions without making misogynistic comments.

[njbill]

Not sure if this has been posted, but here are the comments of RBG's colleagues on the Court. Note especially Thomas' about her graciousness and civility.

https://time.com/5890873/supreme-court- ... urg-death/

[kramerica.inc]

It always warmed my heart that RBG and Scalia were friends. I hope that she is up in heaven wondering where he is.

Fearless RBG.jpg

Given the nature of what our families went through in WW2, I always wondered how some Jewish people could be pro abortion. But to each their own.

So sure, she’s probably up in heaven looking for Scalia...

[seacoaster]

Not sure if this has been posted, but here are the comments of RBG's colleagues on the Court. Note especially Thomas' about her graciousness and civility.

https://time.com/5890873/supreme-court- ... urg-death/

The Souter remarks are so very David Souter.

[njbill]

They must tax you NH boys by the word.

[runrussellrun]

You are correct, I have made fun of RBGs looks and demeanor in the past. I bet you damn near every progressive poster on this forum has said much more disparaging comments about Sarah Palin. Does that also make their comments misogynistic in nature? Maybe those insults and disparaging comments were different.? Explain to me what the rules are when it comes to misogynistic comments. I guess it matters what political party the person belongs to?

I don't think people made negative comments about Palin's looks.

We can all look up the definition of misogynistic, but I think combining nasty (your word) remarks with negative comments about her looks seems to pretty squarely qualify to me.

To look at it another way, you can criticize, or disagree with, her opinions and positions without making misogynistic comments.

This is a DIRECT quote:

" Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?"
"Because Janet Reno is her father"

POS senator john mccain, age 62

Of course, locker room talk about "grabbing" a kitty cat, IS the same as actually calling your wife another name for "whats new wimp cat, whoa, a whoa whoaaa "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADmuftIjlSE

and MDLAXfan LOVES john mccain............such principles

[cradleandshoot]

You can listen to oral arguments on C SPAN. If your bored and channel surfing late at night they have them on every so often. I have to my own embarrassment spent many hours listening to them. You do not get any video but you can listen to the judges questioning the lawyers arguing in front of them. Does the fact I disagree and dislike RBG equate to you speaking ill of the dead? What have I said about her since her passing that equates to ill will? If not jumping on the RBG lovefest wagon means I am disrespecting her, then so be it. If trump bit the farm tomorrow you would witness a whole new level of illl will towards the deceased.
FTR Scalia was also nasty and ornery towards any lawyer arguing in front of him that was not prepared to argue his/her case. I did not reach up my ass and pull this opinion out. I observed what I heard listening to oral arguments when they are on TV. I can tell you Justice Thomas has a wonderful demeanor during oral arguments. He never asks a single freaking question of any lawyer. That sure does speed up the process doesn't it?

Yes, you are right about delayed audio broadcasts of arguments. I was thinking about live broadcasts.

What have you said that equates to speaking ill of the dead?

"Nasty temperament."

"Very mean and short tempered."

"Grade A b*tch."

"Nasty nature."

The extreme nature of my response is due in large part to you misogynistic past comments about her looks. She's a woman, you find her unattractive, and she's a liberal. That is three strikes against her in your book.

You are correct, I have made fun of RBGs looks and demeanor in the past. I bet you damn near every progressive poster on this forum has said much more disparaging comments about Sarah Palin. Does that also make their comments misogynistic in nature? Maybe those insults and disparaging comments were different.? Explain to me what the rules are when it comes to misogynistic comments. I guess it matters what political party the person belongs to?

How about sharing with us what you think those misogynistic comments about Palin were?

You do realize that criticizing a woman is not necessarily misogynistic, right?

Except when I make the comment. If you have this forum for a long time you read some of the things that were said here about Mrs Palin. You would have to go back to the laxpower water cooler to read them. They were vile and disgusting and disparaged her and her family as a bunch of stupid, ignorant hillbillies. I am certain that there are a few other posters other than myself that remember the insensitive comments directed at Mrs Palin. They were nasty and ugly by your own standards. I am guessing that since you do not remember reading them that they were never said?

[cradleandshoot]

You are correct, I have made fun of RBGs looks and demeanor in the past. I bet you damn near every progressive poster on this forum has said much more disparaging comments about Sarah Palin. Does that also make their comments misogynistic in nature? Maybe those insults and disparaging comments were different.? Explain to me what the rules are when it comes to misogynistic comments. I guess it matters what political party the person belongs to?

I don't think people made negative comments about Palin's looks.

We can all look up the definition of misogynistic, but I think combining nasty (your word) remarks with negative comments about her looks seems to pretty squarely qualify to me.

To look at it another way, you can criticize, or disagree with, her opinions and positions without making misogynistic comments.

Yes they did. I will say this, some of those people that made those comments still post on here today. Unless they have a bad case of CRS they can defend their own comments made back then. The comments I made about RBG were bush league to some of the vile comments made by our own fanlax members just a few years ago. If your going to hold me to this standard you have a good number of posters here who should repudiate their own hateful comments. Step forward you folks, you know who you are.

[seacoaster]

More from people with a basis for an opinion:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/20/opin ... e=Homepage

"There was our justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg: “At the end of the day, the government is throwing to the wind the women’s entitlement. …” She was forcefully intervening at oral argument in the last months of her life, in a case about access to contraception under the Affordable Care Act. Her dissent, issued in July, condemned the majority for leaving potentially half a million women to “fend for themselves.”

It was her last opinion about gender equality after a lifetime of advocacy and leadership on the court. She was keenly aware, as she always was, of how the law affects real women in real life. And as always, nothing could stop her from speaking up.

We clerked for Justice Ginsburg in the 1997 and 2003 terms. She was a role model for us in law and in life; how to work, how to write, how to advocate, how to partner, how to mentor. She was already famous when we clerked for her. But that she later became a feminist icon in her octogenarian years for millions of little girls around the world is nothing short of extraordinary.

This didn’t happen through loudness of voice, harshness of words or a biting cynicism about the world. It was through a remarkable legal intellect, an incomparable work ethic and a powerful vision of what justice and equal treatment for men and women mean in reality. Her once-radical vision of gender equality penetrated the law in countless areas, not just reproductive rights but also workplace discrimination, class-action law, criminal procedure — in every aspect of how women interact with the world. And she lived that vision through every aspect of her personal life, too.

Justice Ginsburg was the last justice on the court to have spent time before the bench as a legal advocate for equality. (Justice Thurgood Marshall was the last before her.) Today we take for granted her vision of gender equality. But we should never forget that it was not until 1971 that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Constitution prohibits discrimination based on sex. That was Justice Ginsburg’s case — Reed v. Reed, which challenged the rule that men were the preferred administrators of estates of deceased persons, and that gave a grieving mother the right to administer the estate of the son she lost.

For Justice Ginsburg, equality did not mean special­ — she would say “pedestal” — treatment for women. Equality meant the same treatment for women and men. Stories from her childhood — as when she complained it was unfair that boys had wood shop while girls had sewing — are renowned. As an advocate, her litigation strategy zeroed in on that radical vision and realized it for all of us.

She often used male instead of female plaintiffs to show sex discrimination prevents all people from realizing their full potential. Why shouldn’t a man, for example, receive the same Social Security benefits a woman would receive, so he could stay home to care for his child after his spouse died? She successfully brought that question to the court in the 1975 case Weinberger v. Weisenfeld. She has said in interviews: “The aim was to break down the stereotypical view of men’s roles and women’s roles.”

Over the next 45 years, Justice Ginsburg would extend that vision into every corner of American life. In 1996, she wrote a pathbreaking opinion striking down Virginia’s provision of single-sex public education for men only (at a military institute), giving us both the law and the vocabulary to describe her vision. She eschewed the term “women’s rights.” Instead, equal protection demanded that both women and men be given “full citizenship stature — equal opportunity to aspire, achieve, participate in and contribute to society.”

Then there were the dissents — they had an extraordinary impact even before she became the leader of the court’s liberal wing and gained the moniker “notorious R.B.G.” In 2006, with Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement, Justice Ginsburg became the only woman on the court. She spoke ever louder. In a case upholding a federal ban on late-term abortions, Justice Ginsburg’s dissent attacked the majority for its paternalistic concern that women could not be trusted to make decisions they would not regret: “The Court invokes an anti-abortion shibboleth for which it concededly has no reliable evidence,” she wrote. “This way of thinking reflects ancient notions about women’s place in the family and under the Constitution — ideas that have long since been discredited.”

In a criminal procedure case about a strip search of a 13-year-old girl for ibuprofen, the justice reacted to a male colleague’s asking why stripping in the gym was “a major thing.” Shaking out one’s bra and underwear and then being forced to sit in the hallway for two hours, she said, was not mere locker-room play. It was an “abuse of authority.”

In a 2007 equal pay case, Justice Ginsburg — herself a victim of early-career workplace discrimination — chided her colleagues for deciding that a woman who does not file a claim immediately can never file at all. This ignored the actual “characteristics of pay discrimination.” “Small initial discrepancies,” she wrote, “may not be seen as meat for a federal case, particularly when the employee, trying to succeed in a nontraditional environment, is averse to making waves.”

In a 2011 employment discrimination class action, she faulted colleagues for overlooking how “subjective decision making can be a vehicle for discrimination.” She referenced a favorite example from a favorite pastime: Orchestras with blind auditions hire more women.

The magnitude of her legal legacy cannot be overstated. But her impact was even greater because she modeled for us and for women and girls around the world how to live a life that reflected her legal vision. She demanded a lot from her law clerks, but demanded even more from herself. She was the hardest working, most deliberate person either one of us has ever worked for. She taught us to be strong and to stand behind our work. She gave countless women and men opportunities and support in the life of the law. She got to know all of our children. Her famous faxes came across the channels at all hours of the night. Her black coffee always brewed strong.

In her home life, she modeled to us how to translate the radical legal change she worked to the personal. She and her husband, Martin, were insistently equal co-partners in marriage and parenting and had a marriage for the ages.

Her commitments were always the same and grew ever louder. Even at the very end, she reminded us how much more work there is left to do."

Abbe R. Gluck is a law professor and faculty director of the Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy at Yale Law School. Gillian E. Metzger is a law professor and faculty co-director of the Center for Constitutional Governance at Columbia Law School.

[njbill]

Well, I don't remember negative stuff about Palin's looks. Maybe I wasn't reading everything on the WC back then.

There are lots of reasons to say negative things about Palin without addressing her looks or gender.

[kramerica.inc]

Next in line?

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/se ... ourt-trump

[jhu72]

Not sure if this has been posted, but here are the comments of RBG's colleagues on the Court. Note especially Thomas' about her graciousness and civility.

https://time.com/5890873/supreme-court- ... urg-death/

Looking at the list of other justices she has served with, not one of them will get as big of a mention in the history books. I think it is under appreciated just how highly she is thought of by your average American woman. Saw my daughter yesterday. I was blown away when she and my wife, at lunch, began to rattle off a list of ways Ginsburg impacted their daily lives, brought about change that impacted them in their daily lives and their ability to accomplish the things they have. The change not as a member of SCOTUS, but the cases she won. The laws that discriminated against women, that she changed. This country was a very different place in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s for women, before Ginsburg.

You Trumpnista ankle biters are just that. Silly little people.

[a fan]

Next in line?

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/se ... ourt-trump

At first blush, she sounds qualified to me. And she sounds like she was one hell of a teacher.

Only three years on the Federal bench is about the only weak spot I see....is that enough time to see if her rulings were overturned?

I can't find her dissenting opinions on a few cases cited by the press.

[MDlaxfan76]

You are correct, I have made fun of RBGs looks and demeanor in the past. I bet you damn near every progressive poster on this forum has said much more disparaging comments about Sarah Palin. Does that also make their comments misogynistic in nature? Maybe those insults and disparaging comments were different.? Explain to me what the rules are when it comes to misogynistic comments. I guess it matters what political party the person belongs to?

I don't think people made negative comments about Palin's looks.

We can all look up the definition of misogynistic, but I think combining nasty (your word) remarks with negative comments about her looks seems to pretty squarely qualify to me.

To look at it another way, you can criticize, or disagree with, her opinions and positions without making misogynistic comments.

Yes they did. I will say this, some of those people that made those comments still post on here today. Unless they have a bad case of CRS they can defend their own comments made back then. The comments I made about RBG were bush league to some of the vile comments made by our own fanlax members just a few years ago. If your going to hold me to this standard you have a good number of posters here who should repudiate their own hateful comments. Step forward you folks, you know who you are.

I don't recall anyone disparaging her 'looks', frankly the "misogynistic" comments about such were likely not intended as such, they were positive comments that she was attractive in that way...this from those who liked her politics. I don't recall any of our left leaning posters saying anything negative in that regard.

Which is not to say they didn't rip her for other reasons, some of which you may think were unfair, (or "hateful" or "vile") but I don't recall any being misogynistic or sexist, ie prejudiced in a way that would hold a woman to a different standard than a man.

Palin has since revealed herself to have deserved the harsh critique as remarkably uniformed and shallow for a candidate for VP, but also as a rather hateful culture warrior who loves the spotlight. There are few historical analogues to the first critique, lots of analogues to the latter. IMO, Pence gives her a good run for her money on both dimensions, albeit with a smoother demeanor.

[jhu72]

Next in line?

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/se ... ourt-trump

At first blush, she sounds qualified to me. And she sounds like she was one hell of a teacher.

Only three years on the Federal bench is about the only weak spot I see....is that enough time to see if her rulings were overturned?

I can't find her dissenting opinions on a few cases cited by the press.

I have no opinion of her. Very happy Trump is going to appoint a woman. May be just a little on the young side. At least she is not one of the boys club crony types.

[wgdsr]

Not sure if this has been posted, but here are the comments of RBG's colleagues on the Court. Note especially Thomas' about her graciousness and civility.

https://time.com/5890873/supreme-court- ... urg-death/

Looking at the list of other justices she has served with, not one of them will get as big of a mention in the history books. I think it is under appreciated just how highly she is thought of by your average American woman. Saw my daughter yesterday. I was blown away when she and my wife, at lunch, began to rattle off a list of ways Ginsburg impacted their daily lives, brought about change that impacted them in their daily lives and their ability to accomplish the things they have. The change not as a member of SCOTUS, but the cases she won. The laws that discriminated against women, that she changed. This country was a very different place in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s for women, before Ginsburg.

really amazing what she did throughout her "2" careers. and the impact she had, still accelerating. especially noted with what she was up against with regard to society's norms and conventions and prejudices during those times, which are impossible to underestimate.
she was as much mlk as thurgood in making a movement.

[jhu72]

You are correct, I have made fun of RBGs looks and demeanor in the past. I bet you damn near every progressive poster on this forum has said much more disparaging comments about Sarah Palin. Does that also make their comments misogynistic in nature? Maybe those insults and disparaging comments were different.? Explain to me what the rules are when it comes to misogynistic comments. I guess it matters what political party the person belongs to?

I don't think people made negative comments about Palin's looks.

We can all look up the definition of misogynistic, but I think combining nasty (your word) remarks with negative comments about her looks seems to pretty squarely qualify to me.

To look at it another way, you can criticize, or disagree with, her opinions and positions without making misogynistic comments.

Yes they did. I will say this, some of those people that made those comments still post on here today. Unless they have a bad case of CRS they can defend their own comments made back then. The comments I made about RBG were bush league to some of the vile comments made by our own fanlax members just a few years ago. If your going to hold me to this standard you have a good number of posters here who should repudiate their own hateful comments. Step forward you folks, you know who you are.

I don't recall anyone disparaging her 'looks', frankly the "misogynistic" comments about such were likely not intended as such, they were positive comments that she was attractive in that way...this from those who liked her politics. I don't recall any of our left leaning posters saying anything negative in that regard.

Which is not to say they didn't rip her for other reasons, some of which you may think were unfair, (or "hateful" or "vile") but I don't recall any being misogynistic or sexist, ie prejudiced in a way that would hold a woman to a different standard than a man.

Palin has since revealed herself to have deserved the harsh critique as remarkably uniformed and shallow for a candidate for VP, but also as a rather hateful culture warrior who loves the spotlight. There are few historical analogues to the first critique, lots of analogues to the latter. IMO, Pence gives her a good run for her money on both dimensions, albeit with a smoother demeanor.

I don't recall anything personal that would not have been fair game if she were a man. She was generally thought to be silly, not very bright, unserious person (The Denali Ditz). Time has proven those of that opinion correct.

[Peter Brown]

Not sure if this has been posted, but here are the comments of RBG's colleagues on the Court. Note especially Thomas' about her graciousness and civility.

https://time.com/5890873/supreme-court- ... urg-death/

Looking at the list of other justices she has served with, not one of them will get as big of a mention in the history books. I think it is under appreciated just how highly she is thought of by your average American woman. Saw my daughter yesterday. I was blown away when she and my wife, at lunch, began to rattle off a list of ways Ginsburg impacted their daily lives, brought about change that impacted them in their daily lives and their ability to accomplish the things they have. The change not as a member of SCOTUS, but the cases she won. The laws that discriminated against women, that she changed. This country was a very different place in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s for women, before Ginsburg.

really amazing what she did throughout her "2" careers. and the impact she had, still accelerating. especially noted with what she was up against with regard to society's norms and conventions and prejudices during those times, which are impossible to underestimate.
she was as much mlk as thurgood in making a movement.

Ginsbrug deserves respect for her career (lasting until 87) but that's about it. She was a Democratic judge not an American judge, full stop. She's not even being buried according to Jewish law; nope, the DNC and RBG agreed prior to her death that she would lie in state.

Politicians lying in state drives me bananas, and yes she was a politician. There isn't one significant decision in her career that you could not have pre-guessed a mile away. The only judges that even look at the US Constitution anymore are conservative judges, which is why every so often they vote against the state and not with their colleagues. Liberal judges vote as a clique, easily forecast, to appease their voters and not the law and definitely not America.

No offense to RBG, but she will be forgotten not remembered. She was not an intellectual and was not even a force. She voted like the DNC wanted her to vote. That does not make a 'great' judge, that makes a judge that Democrats salivate over. Sorry to dent your preferred RBG hagiography; you can cry to other posters.

[jhu72]

Yawn. Did I just hear a gnat fart?