September 28, 2017

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg apparently hasn’t learned her lesson about not making controversial political statements. The last time she did it was to slam Donald Trump during the 2016 election, for which she later issued this apology: "Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect."

Yet in a CBS interview, she was back at it again, asserting that she has “no doubt” that sexism was a “major, major factor” in Hillary Clinton’s loss. Granted, at least she’s now making statements about elections that are over (Note to Hillary Clinton and her supporters: the election is OVER!) Still, when SCOTUS Justices make partisan political statements, they set themselves up for demands that they recuse themselves from any future cases in which the biases they expressed might play a role in their rulings.

Even liberals should be concerned about this: if they want Ginsburg to bring a liberal perspective to politically-charged cases, they shouldn’t want her providing ammunition to the other side that could force her to recuse herself. Many liberals are trying to make the case right now that some of Neil Gorsuch’s speeches to conservative groups such as the Federalist Society undermine his independence. They might want to get that message to Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Commentary continues below advertisement

Incidentally, maybe I just think more highly of Americans than the Inside-the-Beltway crowd does (possibly because I actually talk to them), but I believe most voters care far more about policies than they do gender or race. If the Democrats had nominated Bernie Sanders and the Republicans had nominated Condoleezza Rice, do you really think those “sexist, racist” Republican voters would have supported the white male socialist over the African-American woman? Me, neither.


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

Leave A Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

Comments 1-10 of 10

  • Marolyn Gray

    09/30/2017 03:32 PM

    Everyone has a right to vote for whomever they choose no matter what the reason. My voice tells me to vote Republican.

  • Susan Weintrob

    09/29/2017 02:15 PM

    Interesting that I don't remember SCJ Ginsberg saying it was sexism when Obama beat Clinton. How the times they are a'changing!

  • Deborah Lemons

    09/29/2017 01:52 PM

    Thanks Mike for your comments and perceptions, your understanding and explanations re. how government should work. I almost always agree 100%. Thank you for helping to keep the news and opinions sane for us - "the deplorables" (HRC), the one's who "cling to our religion and our guns" (BHO), the one's who do not know "what is best for us" (BHO). It is nice to have someone say and agree with how we think and feel. Since Congress could not agree on Healthcare - something that does not affect them at all - why could't they be smart enough and honest enough to actually ask THE PEOPLE what they want?

    I like the comments by the Nevel's and I totally agree with their analysis. For those of who live by SS, it is hard to find extra $$ to donate and to help. I find I have to be very selective, so I tend toward Faith Based organizations that are actually helping others for my donating. Thank you for what you do, for keeping people informed and for standing against the "mire" of the swamp.

  • Paul E Avizinis

    09/29/2017 01:00 PM

    To make comments like Ginsberg ( a sitting SC justice ) casually does, flares and alarms should be going off. 'Term limits' should be shouted from the roof-tops. All decisions she made during her tenure become suspect and it is for a life time. There are bad judges, truly evil, and, at least, here in the US the opportunity to shorten the pain, term limits. Regarding shift of power, judges should be appointed to be constitutional and not left or right. Should,should, long as the populace continues to change with the wind, we will forever be at the mercy of man, see James 4:4. We may not get to be a red martyr, but white martyrs are becoming more and more common in these end-times.

  • wailes j blalock jr

    09/29/2017 12:33 PM

    Anytime we point a finger at others, there are fingers being pointed back at us.

  • Harold and Jacquelyn Nevels

    09/29/2017 10:05 AM

    We so appreciate you, personally, Mike Huckabee, and your comments; we read every word! We appreciate yours & your wife's sweet daughter, who does such a fine job for the administration! We agree with every word, btw, that you write, not because we follow just any "doctrine", but because we actually find ourselves in the same "camp" both as Americans and as Christians. Thank you so very much for your life of commitment and for the evidence we see from that. We would like to send donation, truly, but SS does not afford such ("silver and gold have .... none, but such as we have....") We have praise for a Lord who has given us a lifetime of sharing with others (we seek no praise for us; it was as He would have it and "not of ourselves"), yet we do find coffers empty as octogenarians, but praising the Lord for His unspeakable riches and provision!)
    Thank you for letting me voice this, and thank you for reading it! Sending our prayers and affection to you and your family.

  • Sandra Fischer

    09/29/2017 09:55 AM

    Intelligent, discerning voters never vote for or against anyone because of their gender, race or social status. So many people voted for Obama because he is black and some likely voted for Hillary because she is a woman, but that will never serve us (as shown by Obama's tenure) as putting into office the best individuals to lead us. We could learn from Andrew Hamilton's comment when he voted for Thomas Jefferson instead of Aaron Burr, although he had issues with both. He said he would rather vote for one who had some principles than someone who had none at all. Of course, we know how all that turned out. Principles, character and values should be the guiding compass for selecting our leaders.

  • Joyce Boykin

    09/28/2017 05:09 PM

    I would love to vote for a woman for president. Just not the one who ran in 2016. I'm pretty picky, but not stuck on one party over the other. I will vote for the candidate I believe is best for the job. Failing that criteria, i vote for the lesser of the two evils. If either party can present a stable, sane, country-first woman as a candidate for president, I will vote for her. So far Hillary, Elizabeth Warren or Maxine Waters do not fit in that category. Any o e else?

  • Amelia Little

    09/28/2017 12:51 PM

    Too many people don't pay attention. Hilary didn't lose because she is a woman. She lost because her platform consisted of: "I've worked for 30 years in politics to become President." "It's my turn." "It's time to have a woman President"--of course, not bothering to mention what she, as a President, would do if elected, what issues she would address. And, of course, there was all the Trump bashing, again, pointing out what she felt HE was saying/doing wrong without actually mentioning what she would do in his shoes. I would have thought that, as a person getting a seat on SCOTUS, Ginsberg would have had to have some intelligence. Maybe she is just more of a feminist than an impartial judge.

  • Robert Wrucke

    09/28/2017 12:33 PM

    Very well said Mike! We need to have a lot more people like you with a platform to speak the TRUTH!