“We Were Best Buddies”: Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s Tribute to Justice Scalia

Best Buddies: So Touching to read about this friendship.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg describes her relationship with the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia thusly: “we were best buddies.” As we get ready to watch Obama and the Left unleash their brass knuckle tactics in another power grab, it’s nice to reflect of the friendship of two members of the Supreme Court, who couldn’t have disagreed more about the law. It turns out that when Barack “Punish Your Enemies” Obama said “we can disagree without being disagreeable,” that is in fact possible. Too bad he doesn’t really believe in putting that into practice.

Best Buddies

From People:

He was the brash, larger-than-life, brilliantly sharp-witted conservative bedrock of the Supreme Court. She is the court’s soft-spoken, diminutive, quietly revolutionary liberal voice. More often than not, they found themselves in ideological battle.

Yet in a relationship that lasted decades, through parallel career paths that ended up making them the closest of friends, Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg proved opposites really do attract.

Indeed, they couldn’t have been more fond of each other, as Ginsburg, 82, made clear in a moving tribute to Scalia that she has written in the wake of his death Saturday at age 79.

Read more here.


  1. Some local color:
    Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers remembers Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died Saturday in Texas, as “one of the most brilliant conversationalists” he’s met. The two became acquainted during a fishing trip to Elevenmile Canyon more than a decade ago as well as at two small private dinners both attended.
    Suthers remembers Scalia making a case on the fishing trip that Pete Rose belongs in Major League Baseball’s Hall of Fame for his accomplishments on the field, but should be banned for life from participating in any role in the game for gambling on games when he was manager of the Cincinnati Reds. Suthers, who was U.S. Attorney for Colorado at the time, was invited on the trip by the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, a Washington, D.C.-based group that advocates a strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. It had booked the trip for Scalia after he spoke at its conference.
    “He could talk intelligently about an incredibly wide breadth of topics. He was clearly a baseball fan, and when the topic of Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame came up, he talked quite eloquently that he should be in the Hall of Fame, but he also should be subject to a lifetime ban from the game because of his gambling,” Suthers said.
    Scalia and Suthers also discussed filling out federal financial aid forms, which the justice told him he had spent “half my life” filling out for his nine children while working mostly as a judge, federal government lawyer or law professor. At the time, Suthers said one of his children was attending college.
    Suthers vividly remembers Scalia’s answer to the worst Supreme Court decision in which he participated — a 2001 decision finding the PGA Tour was subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act and thus allow golfer Casey Martin to use a cart between shots because a circulatory condition impaired his ability to walk.
    “He didn’t hesitate for minute when I asked. I thought he was going to tell us about some earth-shattering decision,” Suthers said. “He said five of his colleagues had the audacity to tell the PGA what the rules of golf should be. He said he was ashamed to be part of that decision and couldn’t understand why the only golfer on the court, Sandra Day O’Connor, was part of the majority.”
    Suthers also recalled how Scalia answered another dinner participant’s question about why the Founding Fathers hadn’t put a mechanism in place to limit the power of the federal government. Scalia said the founders had limited federal power by having state legislatures select each states’ U.S. senators. Scalia said federal power grew only after the adoption in 1913 of the 17th Amendment, which changed the way senators are selected to a popular vote.
    “When he gave that explanation, we all realized he was correct,” Suthers said. “He basically said, ‘Don’t mess with the founders,’ which was the core of his judicial philosophy.”
    Suthers argued just one case in front of Scalia, a 2008 hearing on how much Colorado owed Kansas for attorney fees in a 25-year-old case over water rights. Colorado won that round.

    • Wow! Thanks so very much for sharing this story, Randy. I find it especially gratifying because for years, I too (and probably many of you as well) see the 17th Amendment as the beginning of the end of Constitution, as brilliantly crafted by our Founders, who to paraphrase Mozart, we taking dictation from God.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

The Teri O'Brien Show

%d bloggers like this: