Next headline in the New York Times aka the Liberal Death Star: Hell Freezes Over
Note: This post is an update to this one.
Yes, this is a real editorial. After citing Justice Ginsberg’s recent comments about Donald Trump, and what he tweeted in response, the editorial board writes:
There is no legal requirement that Supreme Court justices refrain from commenting on a presidential campaign. But Justice Ginsburg’s comments show why their tradition has been to keep silent.
In this election cycle in particular, the potential of a new president to affect the balance of the court has taken on great importance, with the vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. As Justice Ginsburg pointed out, other justices are nearing an age when retirement would not be surprising. That makes it vital that the court remain outside the presidential process. And just imagine if this were 2000 and the resolution of the election depended on a Supreme Court decision. Could anyone now argue with a straight face that Justice Ginsburg’s only guide would be the law?
Precisely. Of course, they can’t resist mentioning in the next paragraph that Trump is a jerk for his comments on the “Mexican” judge, which has NOTHING to do with Justice Ginsberg’s unfortunate comments.
Should Justice Ginsberg resign? Who is a better candidate for resignation, her or Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who refused to answer almost every relevant question when she appeared yesterday at a House oversight hearing?