Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's unethical behavior

[Brent]

Another high court justice faces questions on ethics

Los Angeles Times
Thursday, March 11, 2004

WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has lent her name and presence to a lecture series co-sponsored by the liberal NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, an advocacy group that often argues before the court in support of women's rights that the justice embraces.
 
In January, Ginsburg gave opening remarks for the fourth installment in the Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Distinguished Lecture Series on Women and the Law.

Two weeks earlier, she had voted in a medical screening case and taken the side promoted by the legal defense fund in its friend-of-the-court brief.

The liberal Ginsburg's involvement with the legal activist group, and recent outside activities by a conservative colleague, Justice Antonin Scalia, have touched off a debate over what kinds of extra-judicial appearances and contacts are appropriate for Supreme Court justices.

The code of conduct for the federal courts does not set clear rules for judges' involvement with advocacy groups. But it warns jurists to steer clear of outside legal activities that would "cast reasonable doubt on the capacity to decide impartially any issue that may come before" them.

Federal law says a judge or justice "shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

Several legal experts said Ginsburg's ongoing affiliation with the legal activist group undercuts her appearance of impartiality. Ginsburg declined to comment.

(Of COURSE she won't comment on her highly questionable and unethical activities. Is anyone surprised? Not me. ...Brent)


Though Ginsburg was well-known as a lawyer for her support of women's rights, Hofstra University law Professor Monroe Freedman said she should have severed her public ties with advocates for women's issues when she was elevated to the Supreme Court by President Clinton in 1993.

"I think this crosses the line," he said.

Kathy Rodgers, president of the NOW legal defense fund, said Ginsburg's connection with the group should not raise questions about her impartiality as a Supreme Court justice.

"She is always very careful in her remarks," Rodgers said. "I've never heard her address cases that are in front of the court. So I don't see any evidence of her violating her impartiality."

Ummmmm, then try opening your eyes, Mzzzzzzz Rodgers- the very fact that Justice Ruth has lent her name and presence to a private, gender-biased special interest group seems like incontrovertble evidence to me. I have to wonder if Mzzzzz Rodgers would be comfortable with a fellow Supreme Court Justice who openly supported a group like 'Fathers Against Paternity Fraud' or something along those lines. My guess is "no".


http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/auto/epaper/editions/today/news_04f4fe8d07a132d90065.html

[StPaulieGirl]

ROTF!  Brent, we've had Ruth's number for years!  Impartial?  Her?  Hahahaha!

Though Ginsburg was well-known as a lawyer for her support of women's rights, Hofstra University law Professor Monroe Freedman said she should have severed her public ties with advocates for women's issues when she was elevated to the Supreme Court by President Clinton in 1993.

Why do you think Ginsburg was appointed in the first place?  Clinton's legacy is nothing more than a communicable disease....

[Peanutsdad]

Actually STPG,,


The Clinton legacy was great press for promoting oral sex ;) .....oops, I forgot,, THAT aint sexual relations....

[StPaulieGirl]

Lol, don't forget to define the word "is"!

Yeah, Bill's legacy.