Bench Memos

Re: Ginsburg’s Astounding Indiscretion

If you need further confirmation that Justice Ginsburg has violated her ethical duties in publicly blathering that Americans are ready for the Court to invent a constitutional SSM right, let’s consider the ethical standard espoused by … Ginsburg herself. 

At her 1993 confirmation hearing, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, invoking her ethical obligation as a judge to maintain both the fact and the appearance of impartiality, steadfastly declined to answer any questions about her views on issues that might come before the Court. As she explained in answering a question about “sexual orientation”: “I cannot say one word on that subject that would not violate what I said had to be my rule about no hints, no forecasts, no previews.” On issue after issue after issue, Ginsburg applied this standard in not answering questions.

Yet Ginsburg somehow now feels justified in openly signaling her views on a question of first impression in a pending case. Appalling.

Under 28 USC 455(a), a justice is obligated to “disqualify h[er]self in any proceeding in which [her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” It’s time to follow the law, Justice Ginsburg.



Most Popular

Politics & Policy

CNN: Everything but the News

For a while, we thought MSNBC had temporarily usurped CNN as the font of fake news — although both networks had tied for the most negative coverage (93 percent of all their news reports) of President Trump’s first 100 days in office. A cynic would argue that CNN had deliberately given Trump undue coverage ... Read More