Ruth Bader Ginsburg is as elusive these days as Sasquatch. And people continue to wonder about her health.
I wrote a piece not long ago, asking Leftists to “Produce Ruth”. In the article, I explained why I think Democrats are hiding the woman:
I went on record recently saying that Ginsburg will not return to the SCOTUS. Also, I don’t think her health will get her through Black History Month.
It’s her third cancer scare. But in this last bout remember she fell and broke three ribs. That’s how they discovered the cancer. Imagine if doctors do any more looking around in that 85-year old carcass.
By now, I suspect the Left have had enough time to find a body-double. Or perhaps they had Hollywood make-up artists create another “Ruth” and slapped the face on Hillary Clinton?
Regardless, the Left claim that Ginsburg’s been spotted.
Frankly I’m not sure I agree with AP’s report on her so-called appearance. Based on their report, can we really can’t be sure?
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is making her first public appearance since undergoing lung cancer surgery in December.
The 85-year-old Ginsburg is attending a concert at a museum a few blocks from the White House that is being given by her daughter-in-law and other musicians. Patrice Michaels is married to Ginsburg’s son, James. Michaels is a soprano and composer.
The concert is dedicated to Ginsburg’s life in the law.
Ginsburg had surgery in New York on Dec. 21. She missed arguments at the court in January, her first illness-related absence in more than 25 years as a justice.
She has been recuperating at her home in Washington since late December.
Ginsburg had two previous bouts with cancer. She had colorectal cancer in 1999 and pancreatic cancer in 2009.
The justice sat in the back of the darkened auditorium at the National Museum of Women in the Arts.
The National Constitution Center, which sponsored the concert, did not permit photography.
James Ginsburg said before the concert that his mother is walking a mile a day and meeting with her personal trainer twice a week.
Regardless of political persuasion, justices should not serve if incapacitated for a prolonged period of time.
Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?
As the saying goes, “Life goes on”, even when justices are not on the court, as Ginsburg isn’t.
Certainly, politics go on. But we see articles that speak to aged justices hanging on. The Huffington Post offered this rationale for keeping aged justices:
Supreme Court justices serve until retirement, impeachment or death. Although various term-limit and mandatory retirement schemes have been pitched over the years, the possibility of implementing such policies by Constitutional amendment would be nearly impossible in the current political climate. Furthermore, such a rule might deprive us of the wisdom of brilliant but aged jurists. Chief Justice Earl Warren turned seventy-five the year he enumerated the Miranda warnings; Hugo Black was already seventy-seven when his decision in Gideon v. Wainwright guaranteed criminal defendants a right to counsel; Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was approaching seventy-nine when he promulgated the seminal “clear and present danger” test for free speech in Schenk v. United States.
But what of the other situations similar to what Ginsburg likely faces?
The article continues,
However, at the opposite end of the spectrum, Justice Joseph McKenna, severely debilitated by a stroke in 1915, served through ten years of significant cognitive impairment before Chief Justice William Howard Taft pressured him to resign in 1925. Similarly, Justice William O. Douglas was apparently so diminished by his early seventies that the other eight justices agreed to disregard or circumvent his vote in cases where they split 4-4.
In preparation to rid the SCOTUS of newly-appointed Justice Kavanaugh, Fast Company explained the only way to remove a SCOTUS justice.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution included a process to do just that. That said, it has never really been done successfully. Yet.
Section 1 of Article 3 of the Constitution says:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
This means that the justices hold office as long as they choose and can only be removed from office by impeachment. The only Justice to be impeached was back in 1805, when Associate Justice Samuel Chase–who was appointed by President George Washington–was accused of allowing his political views to interfere with his decisions and “tending to prostitute” the court and his position. (You can read the riveting account on the U.S. Senate’s website.) The House of Representatives passed Articles of Impeachment against him, but he was acquitted by the Senate.
You can bet Leftists will fight tooth and nail to keep Ginsburg on the court, even if she must be kept alive by life-support.
A 6-3 court would crush their hopes for the New World Order for at least a decade.
Nevertheless, Republicans shouldn’t give up. Force the Left to produce Ruth.
Make her get back to work or the court can rule with only 8 members, as the court did when McKenna suffered a stroke.
I stand by my prediction that RBG doesn’t make it through Black History Month. I’m not being cruel when I say you reach a certain point where the body ages in dog-years. RBG has reached that point. It’s time she retire.