Apple CEO Tim Cook praises Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the occasion of her death

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, died at her home in Washington D.C. on Friday. She was 87.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Ruth Bader Ginsburg

The cause of death was complications of metastatic pancreatic cancer, the Supreme Court said.

U.S. President Trump was informed of Ginsburg’s death by reporters after a campaign rally in Minnesota. In brief remarks to reporters before boarding the Air Force One following the Minnesota rally, Trump said, “She just died? Wow… She led an amazing life. What else can you say? She was an amazing woman, whether you agreed or not, she was an amazing woman who led an amazing life. I’m actually sad to hear that. I am sad to hear that.”


Apple CEO Tim Cook paid tribute to Ginsburg via Twitter:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg spent her life in pursuit of an equal world. She fought for the unheard, and through her decisions, she changed the course of American history. We can never repay what she has given us, but we all can honor her legacy by working toward true equality, together.Apple CEO Tim Cook


The Supreme Court of the United States issued the following statement:

Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died this evening surrounded by her family at her home in Washington, D.C., due to complications of metastatic pancreas cancer. She was 87 years old. Justice Ginsburg was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Clinton in 1993. She was the second woman appointed to the Court and served more than 27 years. She is survived by her two children: Jane Carol Ginsburg (George Spera) and James Steven Ginsburg (Patrice Michaels), four grandchildren: Paul Spera (Francesca Toich), Clara Spera (Rory Boyd), Miranda Ginsburg, Abigail Ginsburg, two step-grandchildren: Harjinder Bedi, Satinder Bedi, and one great-grandchild: Lucrezia Spera. Her husband, Martin David Ginsburg, died in 2010.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. said of Justice Ginsburg: “Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature. We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her — a tireless and resolute champion of justice.”

Justice Ginsburg was born in Brooklyn, New York, March 15, 1933. She married Martin D. Ginsburg in 1954. She received her B.A. from Cornell University, attended Harvard Law School, and received her LL.B. from Columbia Law School. She served as a law clerk to the Honorable Edmund L. Palmieri, Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, from 1959–1961. From 1961–1963, she was a research associate and then associate director of the Columbia Law School Project on International Procedure. She was a Professor of Law at Rutgers University School of Law from 1963–1972, and Columbia Law School from 1972–1980, and a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Stanford, California from 1977–1978. In 1971, she was instrumental in launching the Women’s Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union, and served as the ACLU’s General Counsel from 1973–1980, and on the National Board of Directors from 1974–1980. She was appointed a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1980. During her more than 40 years as a Judge and a Justice, she was served by 159 law clerks.

While on the Court, the Justice authored “My Own Words” (2016), a compilation of her speeches and writings.

A private interment service will be held at Arlington National Cemetery.


U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement on the passing of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:

The Senate and the nation mourn the sudden passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the conclusion of her extraordinary American life.

Justice Ginsburg overcame one personal challenge and professional barrier after another. She climbed from a modest Brooklyn upbringing to a seat on our nation’s highest court and into the pages of American history. Justice Ginsburg was thoroughly dedicated to the legal profession and to her 27 years of service on the Supreme Court. Her intelligence and determination earned her respect and admiration throughout the legal world, and indeed throughout the entire nation, which now grieves alongside her family, friends, and colleagues.

In the last midterm election before Justice Scalia’s death in 2016, Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president’s second term. We kept our promise. Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year.

By contrast, Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary. Once again, we will keep our promise.

President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.


MacDailyNews Take: R.I.P., Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

128 Comments

  1. RIP, RBG.

    After the appropriate mourning period…

    Okay, that’s enough. I echo Ted Cruz’s words from earlier tonight:

    We are one vote away from losing our fundamental Constitutional liberties. And I believe that the President should next week nominate a successor to the court and I think it is critical that the Senate takes up and confirms that successor before Election Day… This nomination is why Donald Trump was elected, this confirmation is why the voters voted for a Republican majority in the Senate, and… it’s tremendously important that not only does the nomination happen next week, but the confirmation happen before Election Day because Joe Biden and the Democrats have made clear that they intend to challenge this election, they intend to fight the legitimacy of the election – as you know, Hillary Clinton has told Joe Biden “under no circumstances should you concede, you should challenge this election,” and we cannot have Election Day come and go with a 4-4 Court. A 4-4 Court that is equally divided cannot decide anything. And I think we risk a Constitutional crisis if we do not have a nine-justice Supreme Court, particularly when there is such a risk of a contested election.

    Twenty years ago, I was part of the legal team that litigated Bush v. Gore and when to the Supreme Court. 37 days, the country did not know who the president was going to be and if we had a 4-4 court, it could have dragged on for weeks and months. So, I think we have a responsibility. A responsibility to do our job. The President should nominate a principled constitutionalist with a proven record and the Senate… should do our job and protect the country from the constitutional crisis that would result otherwise.

    Say “Hello” to Amy Coney Barrett

    1. Said Ted Cruz who is on Trump’s short list of potential jurors.

      Here’s the truth: Trump will nominate before the election. The person will be a moderate conservative — just conservative enough to make conservative voters salivate, but not so conservative that it will piss off middle of the road Democrats. Strong possibility that it’s a woman or minority.

      This person will not get a vote before the election. That would waste the election motivation of his voters.

      Whether or not there’s actually a vote in the senate will depend on whether straw polls conducted internally in the senate show that the person will get the votes from republicans. This may depend on large part on election results.

      The game is on.

      1. After what happened to Merrick Garland, there is no way that the republicans have any right to nominate ANYONE. If Mitch McConnell can turn the constitution on and off whenever he feels like it, then there is no constitution. That leaves us with nothing but a might-makes-right society.

        So don’t start complaining when the God-Emperor you get isn’t the one you cheated for.

        1. Wrong.

          The so-called “McConnell rule” does not apply to SCOTUS nominations during an election year when the Senate and the presidency are held by the same party. The Merrick Garland comparison is false because in 2016 Obama held the presidency and the GOP held the Senate.

          Start getting used to the idea of Justice Amy Coney Barrett because we’re going to have her on the Supreme Court for the next 4-5 decades!

          1. That is bul|$#I& and you know it. You made this up four years ago, and said nothing about congress at the time. How can you possibly expect reasonable people to share a nation with you when you do this?

            1. And, if not ACB, I’d love to have President Trump nominate Daniel Cameron, Attorney General of Kentucky, but I fear the Dems would “Clarence Thomas” him to virtual, if not actual, death.

            2. So now I hear all this talk about the Biden rule. It’s frankly ridiculous. There is no Biden rule. It doesn’t exist. There’s only one rule I ever followed on the Judiciary Committee; that was the Constitution’s clear rule of the advice and consent. Article Two of the Constitution clearly states, whenever there is a vacancy in one of the Court’s created by the Constitution itself, the Supreme Court of the United States, the president shall — not may — the president shallappoint someone to fill the vacancy with the advice and consent of the United States Senate. And advice and consent includes consulting and voting! – Joe “Sleepy” Biden

              So, there you go. It’s all settled. President Trump and Sleepy Joe agree. The president shall nominate a justice, as he said he would, and the Senate shall hold a confirmation vote, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has already vowed.

            3. Political troll First Then said elections have consequences.

              He lies.

              Elections have no consequences because neither corrupt party is working for the average citizens. The puppet politicians are in it for their own power and wealth, or whatever their oligarch handlers allow them to have.

              The fact that First Then is so wrapped up in politics that he has to act like a partisan asshole on a tech blog shows how successful the parties have been at brainwashing Americans to squabble over the crumbs while the fat cats take the cake.

              Tim Cook and his billions will counter your endless trolling, First Then. The rich get what they want. All you get is high blood pressure and a lot of enemies who you could have otherwise worked with for a better common good.

            4. Sounds like you went to a struggling underfunded public school. Please educate yourself you do not know what you are talking about on this issue and my advice never challenge “reasonable people” that are in full command of the facts.

              BTW, how old are you?

          2. Let the stupid hypocritical excuses come forth. Nominating someone before the election is wrong and does a disservice for all you pricks Who think otherwise. Even that quivering jellyfish Lindsay Graham is against it.

            1. Please explain why it’s “wrong,” Buster.
              Disservice to whom?

              I’m left to assume; to *you.”?

              …and you use a jellyfish to augment your point?

              Feelings maybe?

            2. Thank Harry Reid for your predicament, Democrat losers. And, Ruth Bader Ginsburg who wanted to stay on the Court as long as she could instead of retiring when the feckless Obama was still in office. If she was truly worried about who would take her place she wouldn’t have gambled on her passing. RBG gambled and lost. Conservatives will rule the Supreme Court for at least a generation. 🙂

              President Trump is most certainly Making America Great Again!

            3. The lunatic woman driving the car in the video needs to be taken off the road and locked up in the looney bin and the key destroyed. TDS is a real mental inllnes. MAGA

            4. Your attempt to rewrite history to tell us that a president shouldn’t nominate a Supreme Court justice when a vacancy opens up during an election year is pathetic. U.S. presidents have done so all 29 times that it’s happened in the nation’s history.

              RIP, RBG.

          3. Per origin, “McConnell Rule”, is correctly called “The Biden Rule.”

            https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2020-09-18/bidens-2016-arguments-support-republican-vote-on-new-supreme-court-justice

            Advocacy of and first use of the “nuclear option,” combined with Biden’s Rule…illustrates that “right is right when is serves one’s view.”

            “You’ll regret this…”
            McConnell to Henry Reid yrs ago. If the Rs have the Senate votes, looks like “again” might fit. The votes are a significant “if.”

          4. People of Praise Cult member Amy Coney Barrett, “…a legal career is but a means to an end…and that end is building the Kingdom of God.” …
            believes women are subservient to men and must swear a lifelong commitment oath.
            It gives me no pleasure to see Gilead created before my eyes. The dystopian nightmare continues….and you gloat as civilization crumbles.
            Good luck with the educated women’s vote.

            1. Amy Coney Barrett will not “gloat as civilization crumbles” because Amy Coney Barrett will not only save religious freedoms, but more importantly save the Constitution of the United States and the greatest “civilization” on planet Earth.

            2. Religious freedoms, as the Founders envisioned them, did not include allowing persons who hold one religious view the ability to use the Federal Government (including the Federal Courts) to impose those beliefs on other Americans who hold different beliefs. To suggest that the Free Exercise Clause allows such a blatant violation of the Establishment Clause is hardly the “salvation” of the Constitution.

            3. @TxUser we do not need a historic lecture on religious freedom as related to the Constitution.

              No one is advocating imposing one’s religious views on another.

              It is amazing how out of touch the righteous left can be preaching to others espousing their fears rather than simply following reality.

            4. Assume that you are a Jew who carries the recessive gene for Tays-Sachs Disease, as does your fiancée. After prayerful consultation with your rabbi, you conclude that seeking sterilization is required by your religious faith, but there are no non-Catholic hospitals within a hundred miles, although all the hospitals receive public funds. What in the Constitution says that their faith wins and your faith loses?

              How about employees who do not receive affordable insurance covering contraception because of their employers’s religious beliefs that the employee does not share but actively opposes.

              Or suppose you are a Christian who agrees with St. Thomas Aquinas that the fetus does not acquire a human soul until quickening at 17 to 20 weeks. If you live in a state with strong abortion restrictions, the government is imposing the religious views of the legislature on you.

              The First Amendment requires balancing between the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses. That is not some sort of loony leftist notion, but basic constitutional dogma. Judge Barrett clearly favors free exercise and disfavors disestablishmentarianism (always wanted to use that in a sentence).

          1. Will Chamberlain, the irrelevant washed up propagandist who stooped so low as to call Nelson Mandela a « marxist ».

            Who knew that giving equal rights to blacks would cause conservitards around the world to lose their minds. How dare those brown skin people have equal rights. Equal rights must be labeled marxism now. Greed knows no bounds.

        2. I remember, not too long ago, some idiot going around the country saying multiple times, “You can keep your doctor. You can keep your plan.”, lying, in order to play his con game of getting his BS bill passed, so he can sign into law thus creating his legacy and justifying his meaningless existence.

          A law from such a snakeoil salesman should not be Constitutional if obtained by nefarious actions. Too bad John Roberts of SCOTUS didn’t want to be labeled racist by the idiot mob rule of the Left, so he caved like LeBron James’ Social Justice backbone when it came to China yanking his dogchain leash on Hong King Freedom Protesters and China’s Xi Jinping threatening LeBought James’ mega $$$ deals.

          No Obama-cultists party or person, Democratic or otherwise, has a moral standing when it comes to demands that Senator Mitch McConnell honor his word!

          See how that crap works and each side artfully knows how to play the game that gives us the “Garbage Governance” we have today.

          It’s why we need term limits.

          Create and pass the “One and Done. Clear out the Scum!” term limit bill into law – TODAY! And let us end the so called career federal politician as a profession!

            1. Not only is your Dementia Democrat tinfoil hat on too tight, your M.O. did not disagree or challenge one point in @Since when does a politician’s word matter? post.

              As usual, you reflexively fall back on a Golden Oldie. Play it one more time:

              Why am I so doubtful whenever you are out of sight…

              WooHoo…

              Deflection…
              torments my heart

              Deflection…
              keeps us apart

              Deflection…
              why torture me

              Parody lyrics from “Suspicion” by the King Elvis …

          1. Exactly RIGHT ON and well said!

            The dumbass career politician in my lifetime Petulant Pelosi doing nothing for the citizens of San Francisco needs to go and 47-year Swamp politician Biden tops the list of Presidential contenders.

            Under Pelosi hometown poverty rises; housing prices unaffordable; criminal illegal immigrants roaming the streets killing citizens; lax law enforcement; taxes through the roof; tent cities taking over sidewalks; homeless defecating and discarding syringes on streets in front of reputable businesses; illegal drug use up; the USA FIRST 💩 map for tourists telling them the streets to avoid to step in it and certainly many more.

            Meanwhile, back in the Pelosi castle on television and videos smiling while eating $13 dollar a pint ice cream out of her $24,000 fridge tone deaf to her constituents in poverty.

            And let’s not forget Queen Nancy Antoinette went further breaking the law in a hair salon visit not wearing a mask or taking full responsibility for her actions blaming everyone except herself. The laws everyone else lives under do not apply to the ruling class was so perfectly illustrated by her selfish action.

            BOTTOM LINE: Politics should NOT BE A CAREER particularly appalling when they enrich themselves and do next to NOTHING to serve their constituents and not solve the problems they campaigned on…

        3. Trump 1.0 is what happens when you nominate the most corrupt politician in modern history

          Trump 2.0 is what happens when you nominate a corrupt, racist dementia patient.

          WE control the Senate. FU libturds. Dems are the party of hypocrisy. Eat what you sow.

          Thanks for your stupidity to guarantee Trump 2.0!!!!

        4. “After what happened to Merrick Garland, there is no way that the republicans have any right to nominate ANYONE.”

          The Republicans and Democrats have their constitutional duty by law to fulfill their obligations.

          What part of this that your petulant post missed, do you not understand?

          1. Obviously, the letter of the Constitution requires the President to nominate and the Senate to offer its advice and consent, although it does not dictate the timing. The glaring inconsistency with that mandate was the Senate refusing to even consider Judge Garland for nine months after he was nominated.

            The Constitution contemplates that a President make his appointments with the advice and consent of the Senate. The confirmation process is not supposed to be a rubber stamp. It is therefore a problem that most Republican Senators have not only announced an intent to consider a nominee, but an intent to vote for confirmation—even though they do not know who the nominee will be. Donald Trump could nominate Donald Duck and most Republican senators would vote for him, just as they would not vote for impeachment if he shot somebody in the middle of Fifth AVenue or was videotaped grabbing a woman by the genitals.

            1. Again: The Republicans and Democrats have their constitutional duty by law to fulfill their obligations” as related to fulfilling an opening on the Supreme Court.

              Your Donald Duck and shooting someone comments are not only false but childish and obviously proves your deflection is meaningless and you lost the argument.

    2. You’re an idiot FirstThen.

      Kanter v. Barr, 919 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 2019). Barrett wrote a lengthy dissent in favor of gun-ownership rights for felons.

      Turns out you republican assholes only care about law&order when it directly protects your fat asses. Taking guns away from felons — Mrs. Candyass 2 Names wouldn’t do it. She is happy to let felons arm up, you know, so they can feel safe at night. Then you bitch endlessly about how felons are making the USA unsafe and you need a dictator to police the scary streets.

      1. The plaintiff was convicted of mail fraud for submitting bills to Medicare for reimbursement for non-compliant therapeutic shoe inserts.

        Non-compliant therapeutic shoe inserts.

        So, he was a non-violent felon. Denying such rights is a violation of the second amendment. Amy Coney Barrett was correct in this regard.

      1. Yes.

        The excesses of the Warren Court must be pared back. And they will be now, thanks to President Donald Trump, infinitely more consequential than most other presidencies already not even through his first term, and Cocaine Mitch McConnell, Apex Predator.

      1. Number One archive video that perfectly illustrates the hypocrisy of Biden and the Democrat Party, thank you @ Ronner!

        It is obvious the Democrats have no integrity in politics for decades and will say anything at anytime simply to gain political advantage of the moment to win an election. It is reprehensible, but somehow the Democrats sleep well with it at night.

        From the video Biden said: “I made it absolutely clear that I would go forward with the confirmation progress, process (stutter) as chairman even a few months before the presidential election.”

        I invite TxUser the self appointed arbiter of liberal MDN political truth to deny the hypocrisy of what Joe said then and now. If he does respond my best guess it will be deflection to protect his self righteous hubris.

        How do Democrats get away with it? Number One defender of Democrats is the biased liberal Democrat media that looks the other way and day after day allows this hypocrisy to continue by not reporting on it and the conclusion is journalism is officially dead.

        Also dead, Catholic Joe Biden from Scranton abandoned his Pro Life and Gun Rights roots decades ago.

        The more the Democrats lie and mount hypocrisy on top of hypocrisy the more the average citizen will see through it and vote the bums out in 2020.

    3. Hey it’s the Russian Troll again, “First Then”. Funny with columns of stories on this Apple Technology news blog, you only seem to show up on posts related to politics. Hard to take you seriously “First Then” when you are obviously a Russian bot here to do Putin’s bidding and stir up a little conflict. Why don’t you head home and settle in with a nice bowl of Borscht.

    4. Why must there be so much of this on a tech blog?

      But since there is… I’ll throw in my 2 cents.

      “The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can’t do.”

      Trump and the senate can appoint another Justice to the Supreme Court. All other excuses about precedent, or “rules” or anything else is simply trying to justify doing what they want to do. The people of the United States did not send them a “strong mandate” when it has been shown that the senate under represents urban voters. All it shows is that the Democrats did a bad job of wooing rural states.

      And all of this stuff about the Democrats “disputing” the outcome of the election. Of course they will! Because they can! AND because Trump has shown that he will do what he can from his position of extreme power to ensure the election is skewed in his favour. Because HE can.

      And if the Democrats win? Well, Trump has indicated in many ways that he would challenge the election results if he loses. In fact, even dating back to 2016, I have NEVER heard him on the news saying that he will honour the results of the election if he loses.

      All of this goes on while the real enemies of America continue to meddle in your election almost unopposed, thanks to years of Republicans referring to the interference as a hoax! Because apparently the possibility that Putin didn’t care if Trump OR Clinton won as long as he deepened the division within the nation is too much for the average American to grasp.

      Your nation is being torn apart by both sides (though I would argue more democrats seem willing to compromise,) and you are too busy congratulating yourselves how you managed to sneak this one by the other party to realize that you are being manipulated.

      Honestly, I feel like I am living in some ridiculous novel where the 2 people who should be friends are first tricked into not trusting each other. Then they are tricked into hating each other. Then they are told that if they give any ground, the other side will see it as weakness and exploit it. Then they believe that anything legal they can do to stop the other side. Then they have to do illegal things to stop the other side. And these 2 great heroes battle it out, while the manipulator sits on the sideline waiting for the chance to strike. In the novel, the heroes would learn to be honest with each other, and the evil plot would be exposed.

      God I hope we aren’t watching the end of American Democracy. But if we are, it will be the party that currently has the majority of the Supreme Court, the presidency, and the senate that will be the ones to order American soldiers to fire on American citizens.

      But then, I’m just a Canadian. What the hell do I know?

      1. We are indeed watching the end of democracy….in the US. Just reading the disrespect for RBG in this ‘discussion’ turns my stomach. Germans are looking at the US and are stunned that only Americans do not see the conversion of the US into pre-war Germany~1933. Again, this time around, Russia is initially the friend, only to turn later.
        Trump already wants Greenland…maybe Iceland next?
        To the non-white Americans, it’s your last chance….be smart in November or the consequences will be your fault.

        1. Hey Buster, what “turns my stomach” is stupid Libtards like you concocting false narratives that do not exist and will not destroy the good old USA. Cut down binge watching on the SYFY channel and Cartoon Network.

          On second thought, take that back — you do not have the power to turn my stomach, not now, not ever!

          The GREAT ORANGE ONE will make the USA greater than ever and your pitiful fear mongering fantasies will become totally irrelevant over time. Got it?

          Enjoy your socialist country high taxes and energy costs…

    1. Why should he?

      The only qualifications to be a Trumpist is you have to kiss the ring, you have to be able to get all huffy red faced and angry on cue, and you have to have some real good frat party stories to tell over drinks at Maralago.

      Trump is no conservative. He’s the puppet of billionaire oligarchs and that is who will choose the next justice for you. Trump has nothing to do with what happens from here on out. And make no mistake, he will be out in Jan 2021.

      It’s the Senate you should worry about. The last hearings were an act of treason on McConnell’s part, filibustering a decent nominee for over a year in order to push through a lightweight partisan puppet with a fetish for beer.

      Stop pretending you have a voice in any of this political theatre. Your vote was sold to the highest corporate bidders (foreign or domestic, no matter) decades ago. The fat cat senators have entrenched themselves behind mountains of PAC money of dubious origin. But sadly now the most corrupt Senate leadership in memory holds sway. Not that it makes much difference, they’re all grifters. Neither party has any principles. We should vote all incumbents out and start all over.

      A decent honorable justice like RGB may not happen for years to come. Women’s rights will be set back 60 years or more. The corrupt graft expert Moscow Mitch won’t allow a fair process to proceed. Today is truly a day for mourning as our once principled republic loses a bastion of integrity and allows corrupt idiots to replace her with another partisan asshat, one more swirl around the toilet bowl as the USA loses its relevance in the world.

    2. doubtful, especially if any of trumpets technically illiterate stooges are nominated

      RBG dramatically advanced women’s equality under law before joining the court

      firsts preferred trumpet nominee with a skirt has done the opposite

      1. Talk about a dim bulb.

        Ronald Reagan nominated the first woman to the Supreme Court and certainly not a stooge.

        President Trump will do the same.

        Lay off the weed and alcohol it has clouded your thinking…

    3. Guessing he will not although he CERTAINLY SHOULD if he respects a conservative Catholic religious woman. The reality is the extreme left he panders to heads will explode and blow up Twitter and the Internet. Tim will not risk losing one beancounter dollar…

    1. RBG’s death at this time proves that God still loves America, despite the sin of millions upon millions of abortions.

      I pray that Amy Coney Barrett gets quickly confirmed by the GOP-led Senate.

      1. To both Sarah and black women for trump….come on. Why some Male teenagers like to use girls names and try to put out extreme hate messages is beyond me. Low testosterone? Fearful of what people think of them as they sit and hide in heir mom’s basement bedroom. Wanking a little too much and made because they are laughed at by girls?
        Go play on tik-tok…oh wait you can’t.

      2. OK you want to have that talk, let’s have that talk. On a supposed Mac news site.

        Theological republicans want to outlaw abortion to save the children. But what true republican would ever have an abortion? The only people who visit abortion clinics are not true republicans.

        So there you have it. Republicans are undermining themselves by creating more future democrats. One cannot determine the various reasons a woman would kill her unborn fetus but we all know that many of them are unfit to be mothers. Many of them will have their liberal brats, demand social services, and increase crime. Sorry but the demographics are clear.

        No wonder the conservatives are so adamantly in favor of personal AK47s. They have been fed nonstop paranoid propaganda that says they need lethal weapons to protect themselves from the rabble they insisted that had to be saved. Neither right nor left trust the expensive police. Gun manufacturers delight.

        Thou shalt not kill, except … whenever the poor get in the way of the rich.

        Meanwhile us moderates who don’t give a shit about your scorched earth politics would appreciate it if you would deliver Mac news again.

        1. “Theological republicans want to outlaw abortion to save the children.”

          If so, are you against saving the children?

          “But what true republican would ever have an abortion?”

          What is a “true Republican?”

          “The only people who visit abortion clinics are not true republicans.”

          So, you have surveyed and interviewed abortion clinics in the USA since the 1970s and have hard numbers to prove your point, or is it opinion?

          Whenever you are ready…

    2. “Every man’s death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind.”

      Even animals mourn the deaths of their fellow beings. It takes human beings to dance on graves. No, those who see a death solely in the light of the advantage to their own party do not qualify as human in any meaningful sense. You all should be ashamed if you had any sense of shame remaining.

        1. But you’re happy when the fatherless poverty stricken uneducated bastards get shot by the police.

          You get to feel all smug knowing that your tax dollars didn’t get spent turning the unwanted child into a happy healthy educated law abiding productive person. You figure that some random charity like Trump’s Kids will surely swoop in to provide the ladder for the poverty class before the drug cartels do, so you don’t have to lift a finger and can go back to watching Faux Newz.

        2. Speaking of “rulings,” here’s some of her thinking on the matter….

          Consistent with Planned Parenthood’s beginnings with Margaret Sanger.

          1. When did America stop teaching how to read English? She never said she agreed with that sentiment. She simply suspected that might have been the motive of the five Republican-appointed justices who joined in the 7-2 decision (one dissenter was Democratic-appointed). When they later voted against Medicare funding for abortions, she changed her mind and decided that eugenics weren’t their motive.

            The elimination of undesirable minorities is not a popular notion among Jews old enough to remember the 1940s. RBG faced descrimination for that as well as her sex. In 1959, the premier law firms in Houston had 329 lawyers, with a couple of women and no Jews.

            The situation was similar in much of the country. The future justices Rehnquist and O’Connor graduated with essentially identical honors from Stanford Law the same year—he went to a SCOTUS clerkship; she got an unpaid job in a rural county attorney’s office.

            Somebody who has lived through that is not somebody likely to support discrimination.

            1. I don’t think it’s as clear as you depict. One could say, “Somebody who has lived through that is not somebody likely to support discrimination,” while at the same time disregarding a living and defenseless being in the womb, manifests the possibility one could discriminate…IF for the right reasons (women’s rights).

              As well, the phrase below shows there was some permission, or agreement that there’s such a thing as too many of a certain kind in society. Being poor, uneducated and unproductive (econ) has been linked to the “who,” with population control being a significant topic at the time.

              “particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

            2. Suggesting that somebody else (the then-current members of the SCOTUS) could be thinking “we might want to reduce populations we have too many of” is hardly the same as holding that opinion oneself. That is particularly clear when the future Justice Ginsburg recalls her fear at the time that state aid for abortions might be used by the white males in power as leverage to require poor women—and particularly minority women—to get abortions. When the then-current members voted against requiring such aid, it relieved her fears on that score. To repeat, a Jew who survived the 1940s would be particularly suspicious of anything that smelled like exterminating “undesirables.”

              You can’t look back on Roe v. Wade with 2020 political presuppositions. Abortion was politically divisive in 1973, but the divisions were not partisan. The Supreme Court split 7-2 on the issue, with the Republicans 5-1 and the Democrats 2-1. There were lots of pro-choice Republican voters and elected officials, and plenty of pro-life Democrats. Some of the pro-abortion advocates in both parties were less interested in women’s rights than in reducing the breeding of “undesirables.” Many feminists, including RBG, saw that as a major threat to women.

            3. You can’t be serious TxUseless blaming Ginsburg words and intentions on Republicans.

              Ginsburg clearly intended to eliminate the undesirables in society and every liberal in New York City that I know echoed the same thoughts.

              They went further by saying taxpayers should not be subsidizing women not having the means to raise their child and abortion was key.

              You are playing a semantic wording game that changes nothing. We know Ginsburg’s intent.

              This is a well known opinion in abortion circles since the 1970s, get a grip…

      1. If she didn’t want to be scorned she should not have voted for so many disasterious decisions to destroy this country. The ability of Trump to replace her with someone honorable is a long-awaited blessing.

      2. Everyone that is either for or against abortion has already been born because of a Pro Life Mother. Inconvenient truth, damn right!

        The worst Supreme Court decision in the history of the United States is granting unlimited abortions right up until birth.

        A mother’s womb should not be a killing field for an innocent victim that had no choice in conception — it should be the safest place on Earth for a developing human being.

        Eliminate abortion it kills millions of innocent developing children. Instead, provide incentives to deliver the child and put it up for adoption if the mother cannot care for it for whatever reason.

        Maintain the sanctity of life is the only humane approach and I am betting the next Supreme Court pick will get it done…

  2. Read through all the comments on this page. Nobody hates America as much as republicans do. They openly brag about loving liberal tears, and disenfranchising half their own country, and somehow expect the USA to continue to exist like this? Republicans are going to tear this nation in two, and you will end up corporate slaves in a Sh–hole county that no one else on earth gives a damn about. Neither side will have remotely the capabilities of what we have now. America will be dead.

    And if you think the military will be on the con’s side:
    1) Trump is the antithesis of all military values and the pentagon hates him.
    2) Why do you think pays for the US military? Where do the taxes come from? Soldiers who throw in with the con side won’t get paid.

      1. Dem/Lib/Progs lost. Dem/Lib/Prog losers need to get used to losing (nearly four years after the fact) because the losing will continue for the forseeable future.

        Thank God for Mitch McConnell.

          1. But conservative impositions on liberty are well known and not new.

            -how to be a “patriot”
            -school prayer.
            -who you can love.
            -how you can dress.
            -whether you can choose to reproduce, by birth control.
            -abortion.
            -voter disenfranchisement

            I don’t have to agree with any of these, but I will defend one’s right to practice any of them.

    1. Oh. My. God. Look at this comment! Look at the replies!

      “so and so says you hate America!”

      “I don’t hate America! I love America! THEY hate America!”

      and back and forth and back and forth. Insults. “morons” “Douchbags” “pricks”

      Dismiss ideas as simply “belonging to the other side.” Nuff said.

      I’m sure the next part would be “but he started it!”

      Childish. ALL OF YOU!

      And First Then, (pretty much the only comment in this string not name calling) it would be easier for Democrats to accept that they lost if Trump stopped blaming Obama for what is happening right now.

  3. Lots to unpack here. First, let’s start with why this seat must be filled before the election.

    If it does not, the court will likely sit at a 4-4 ideological split. And as whiteness in Michigan yesterday (via a Judge) they can continue to received ballots – and count them – for up to TWO WEEKS after the election.

    What is setting up, is absolute chaos for weeks after the election and lawsuits from either party galore.

    SCOTUS will be expedited to step in immediately and make rulings on how any given law is to be enacted in any given state and legal battle.

    At 4-4, it’s chaos and nothing gets solved. Our Framers understood these types of issues, and why they put a zero expiration date as to when the POTUS could nominate a justice, because it can be massively critical to have all 9 seats filled. It’s just gotta be done.

    Secondly, on the political side of the house, Democrat’s cannot cry “precedent” never been done, or any other nonsense. Well, they can, but then they can’t at the same time (which they are doing right now) planning to end the Senate filibuster. Talk about precedent. It’s completely hypocritical.

    As for “Obama didn’t fill SCOTUS at the end of his term, neither should Trump!” Coulda, woulda, shoulda, doesn’t matter. None of the is the law, it’s all political gamesmanship.

    Indeed, Obama did not nominate for SCOTUS at the end of his second term. He only did so because while he held a two-seat lead in the Senate, counting heads, he couldn’t get the Senate to pass that move w/a second-term President. Senators (two independents that caucused with the Dems), and a few others feared for their seats. Voting in a SCOTUS member would have ensured their doom.

    It’s not that Obama didn’t do it on some ethical high ground (which Obama purports is why he didn’t do it), rather, he didn’t do it because he knew the nominee would be voted down by the Senate, making him look weak and hurting Hillary, while firing up the right.

    Trump has every right to fill the seat, and in this election of chaos setting up, he should absolutely do so. Democrat’s, should they win the Senate, also have every right to end the filibuster, should they want to do so.

    No one is out of legal or rule breaking bounds with either direction. The rest is just pure politics.

    1. Where did you get the impression that President Obama did not make a nomination at the end of his term? His nomination of Merrick Garland was still pending on January 3, 2017, when the 114th Congress left office. Obama was only in office for 17 days after that, and even a friendly Senate would not have had time to consider confirmation. The median time from nomination to confirmation is 71 days.

      The issue with that nomination was not that the Senate failed to confirm Garland. The Constitution allows that. It was that the Senate refused to perform its constitutional duty to offer its advice and consent by at least considering the nomination at any point during the 293 days that it was pending. They just sat around, collected their salaries, and refused to do the most important part of their job.

      Now they are claiming that the Republic will fall if the newest vacancy isn’t filled between now and January. That is the inconsistency here.

      1. Tedious FAKE Republican everything you have posted regarding the past is sour grapes.

        Fast forward to today President Trump fulfilling his constitutional and legal duty will nominate a superlative choice for justice. She will be appointed in record time, not 71 days, another RECORD notched for the president.

        Cry and protest all you want — your pitiful party is powerless to stop it…

  4. Man she should have gotten out under Obama clock. She is so old, did she think she would love forever. What’s up with all the really really old people clinging on to control. Don’t they know they can often choose their replacement in a finally act of dignity and wisdom to hand the control the next generation … instead they hang on to the last breath only to undercut the very legacy they have lived for .

    When it’s your time step aside, this democratic political nightmare Is all on her. Heck she was old in Obama’s first term

  5. Tim, please stay out of politics. I don’t care what you think. Steve Jobs, however, I would care a lot. At least he didn’t use Apple to promote and endorse homosexuality. You, however, don’t give a flying you know what about what your conservative, God-loving shareholders think. You said so yourself. As for RBG, rest her soul, but she’s done more to destroy the country than any woman in history except for Pelosi. President and Senate are Republican. They have the right to nominate a SCJ. It’s how politics work. It’s been working this way since the 1880s. Checks and Balances.

    1. The sham duopoly, especially under the arcane rules that ensure senate party’s one goal is always to protect their own corruption and if possible achieve one party rule, has done nothing good for Americans.

      Every one of the founders warned against political parties, but the self serving partisans dug a swamp so deep now that neither corrupt party will ever drain.

      Democrats can’t win if oligarchs holding all the wealth in their corrupt little hands bankroll the rethuglicans. Worse, now political hackert is a global industry. PACs hire the half dozen foreign MDN trolls to shout down all original thoughts on this site, just as the republicans got Cambridge to spread disinformation on other channels, Breitbart is bankrolled by oligarchs, and Faux news is owned by a foreign oligarch too.

      With friends like these, you have to ask yourself who’s representing you in DC. They certainly don’t ever propose solutions, only fear mongering and mus slinging.

      To see how much problems First and his Kiev crew actually care about solving problems for real Americans, read anything he has written. It’s all about how he wants his team to achieve dominant power and wealth, democracy be damned.

      Ginsburg wished for the president elect to nominate her replacement in 2021. That is in keeping with the 2015 McConnell doctrine. If you believe in democracy and the polls that show your orange hero will sweep ton landslide victory on a wave of silent majority populism, then why are you acting so panicked, FirstThen?

      FirstThen needs to get a real job.

          1. Meaningless. And, likely, conjured bullshit.

          2. Unfortunately for “the wish,” the Constitution presides. She knew that…was it hubris that gave her a notion that her wish would override?

            If it was a mere end-of-life fancy, why it it being paraded about, as if it’s to be respected/followed?

      1. Typically nonsensical Dem/Lib/Prog argument: We must substitute the Constitution’s process in order to insert an 87 year old partisan’s dying wish, of which there’s not even any actual record.

        Not gonna happen.

        I have my feet up on my boat, floating on a lake, drinking a Bloody Mary. If that’s “panicked,” more, please.

        1. And, if Ginsburg really had a dying wish, she should have had her liar of a granddaughter point her iPhone at her and press record while she said it. That neither she nor the granddaughter did so tells you everything. It didn’t happen.

          Even if it did, it’s meaningless: Make a Wish™ doesn’t pick Supreme Court justices, Presidents and the Senate do.

Reader Feedback

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