Ginsburg to miss arguments

[tall73]

Ginsburg missing Supreme Court arguments for 1st time


She will still help decide cases on the basis of briefs and transcripts. Do you lose something by only looking at transcripts of arguments, or is it better not to have the tone, emotions etc.?

 

[Albion]

Ginsburg missing Supreme Court arguments for 1st time


She will still help decide cases on the basis of briefs and transcripts. Do you lose something by only looking at transcripts of arguments, or is it better not to have the tone, emotions etc.?

In her case it would not make one iota of difference when it comes to how she rules. If it were permitted, she might just as well stay home and phone in her decision or else give a proxy to Kagan or Sotomayor.

 

[cow451]

Ginsburg missing Supreme Court arguments for 1st time


She will still help decide cases on the basis of briefs and transcripts. Do you lose something by only looking at transcripts of arguments, or is it better not to have the tone, emotions etc.?

Would she not have access to recordings?
Argument Audio

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

You're forgetting the hearings that she slept through. These are not the first that she's missed.

 

[tall73]

Would she not have access to recordings?
Argument Audio

That is part of why I was surprised. It doesn't indicate she would be using recordings, which would seem the most logical to me.

 

[tall73]

You're forgetting the hearings that she slept through. These are not the first that she's missed.

I have not followed her career closely enough to be aware of such things. Do you have a source?

 

[Albion]

I have not followed her career closely enough to be aware of such things. Do you have a source?

How Does a Lady Get Any Sleep Around Here?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Ginsburg missing Supreme Court arguments for 1st time


She will still help decide cases on the basis of briefs and transcripts. Do you lose something by only looking at transcripts of arguments, or is it better not to have the tone, emotions etc.?

I would question whether any ruling Ginsburg would make would be influenced in any way by anything presented during oral arguments given before the Court. She is not unique in this regard. Unfortunately political partisanship has invaded the Supreme Court to the point that Justice Ginsburg feels she must remain there under any circumstance. It is a shame that the partisan atmosphere now even pervades the Court to the point that a woman, suffering in the way she is, feels so constrained to stay on just to keep a balance of political POVs on the Court. It would certainly be preferable if we picked our Supreme Court Justice based solely on their jurisprudence and if all our Supreme Court Justices left their political biases at the door when ruling but neither is the case now nor has it been the case for decades at the least. Additionally, as political POV influences how one views interpreting the Constitution, there is no hope that the situation will change.

 

[yougottabekidding]

Given her voting record, it is pretty clear how she will decide. She is as politically left leaning as one can get.

 

[cow451]

That is part of why I was surprised. It doesn't indicate she would be using recordings, which would seem the most logical to me.

I suggest the article was either in error or presumed the reader knows recordings are available. FYI, the judges all use transcripts.

 

[Nithavela]

How Does a Lady Get Any Sleep Around Here?

2006?

If falling asleep once in 12 years is all you get, I dont think I could beat that.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Given her voting record, it is pretty clear how she will decide. She is as politically left leaning as one can get.

...if that's the case, then she's necessary in order to cancel out C. Thomas, as based on the Martin-Quinn spectrum, he's further right-wing than she is left-wing.

It's a shame that not all justices can be a Roberts or Kennedy...but that's just the sad state of affairs now.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

...if that's the case, then she's necessary in order to cancel out C. Thomas, as based on the Martin-Quinn spectrum, he's further right-wing than she is left-wing.

It's a shame that not all justices can be a Roberts or Kennedy...but that's just the sad state of affairs now.

...and to further elaborate on my previous post, the reason we're in this state of affairs is because "I'll appoint a judge that will help accomplish my agenda" has been a marketing strategy used by presidential hopefuls. Look how much heard (paraphrased) "We need to elect Trump so we can get more conservative justices on the supreme court" during that election cycle. That very attitude alone shows that people are thinking of the courts in a wrong way. They're not there to advance an agenda, they're to interpret the law and make unbiased rulings.