Justice Ginsburg’s Terrifying Assessment Of Her Own Court

[TotallyOz]

n an interview with the New York Times Adam Liptak, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg offered a grim assessment of the Court where she so often finds herself leading a four justice dissent the Roberts Court is one of the most activist courts in history.

As an historic matter, this is a pretty staggering claim. The Supreme Court in 1905 handed down a decision called Lochner v. New York that is now widely taught in American law schools as an example of how judges should never, ever behave. Lochner treated any law improving workplace conditions or helping workers to obtain an adequate wage as constitutionally suspect. And Lochner was hardly an anomalous moment in the Courts history.

Thirteen years after Lochner the Supreme Court struck down federal child labor laws in a decision that is also widely taught as an example of inexcusable judicial activism. In 1895, the Supreme Court rendered the country virtually powerless against monopolies and other powerful combinations of corporate power, and then it held an income tax on the wealthiest Americans unconstitutional just a few months later. The Supreme Court has, with rare exception, been a largely malign force in American history.

There is, however, one important way in which the Roberts Court is distinguishable from the Courts that decided cases such as Lochner. Laws such as the Sherman Antitrust Act and the first federal ban on child labor arose as lawmakers with struggling with many of the negative side effects of the Industrial Revolution. The birth of the railroad and the dawn of mass production massively improved the American standard of living, but they also enabled monopolists to thrive and they resulted in mass exploitation of the working class. The Supreme Court in this era did not so much tear down established rights as it stood for a status quo that favored capital over labor and the rich over the rest of the nation.

The Roberts Court, by contrast, has actively rolled back existing laws protecting workers, women and people of color. The Nineteenth Century Supreme Court blocked Americas first meaningful efforts at racial equality, but the Roberts Court stole from minority voters rights that they had enjoyed for decades. The Lochner Court strangled basic protections for workers in their crib, but the Roberts Court takes fully matured protections for workers and carves them up a piece at a time. And, while Lochner Era courts acted out in the open, undermining human rights in published opinions. the Roberts Court pushes an alternative, corporate-run arbitration system that operates largely in secret.

More here:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/26/2524041/justice-ginsburgs-terrifying-assessment-court/

[RA1]

Is it contagious? The NSA is acting in secret. BO is acting in secret. Now the Supremes? Somehow I think the Supreme Court publishes all of its' rulings for all to see. Not every ramification or result may be immediately obvious but many attorneys go over each one with a fine tooth comb.

There has been dissent on the Supreme Court since day one and obviously every decision is not unanimous, therefore someone will be unhappy. I respect Ginsburg as a person with a fine legal mind but most of the time I am glad she is not on the majority side.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest hitoallusa]

She has this amazing strength. Her life is like a story book and her marriage was what you find in a movie. She took care of her sick husband and raised a child while she was in law school. I respect her and pay attention to what she has to say. I do think however, see this increase in judicial activism as a good thing. I think it will eventually help the court reform itself so that it can work efficiently. Although I believe traditional institutions such as the Supreme Court are important and should be respected, they often get so trapped in their old ideas and ways that they hinder the progress of society. Just hope these justices are able to let go of ill practices that hinder development and progress of our society.

[caeron]

I'm sure it is an appalling thought to some, but I've often wished someone would just shoot Scalia so we could get a more rational court.

[RA1]

Yes, it is appalling to think about shooting any public official. While you may not agree or even completely disagree with Scalia, try to remember that he deserves the same respect as any other SC justice. He sincerely believes that he is defending the Constitution with his opinions and that the SC should not be activist. Surely there is common ground between him and Ginsburg or so I hope.

So far, no modern person is perfect, would you agree?

Best regards,

RA1

[BigK]

Yes, it is appalling to think about shooting any public official. While you may not agree or even completely disagree with Scalia, try to remember that he deserves the same respect as any other SC justice. He sincerely believes that he is defending the Constitution with his opinions and that the SC should not be activist. Surely there is common ground between him and Ginsburg or so I hope.

So far, no modern person is perfect, would you agree?

Best regards,

RA1

Nail...meet Head.

[TotallyOz]

He sincerely believes that he is defending the Constitution with his opinions and that the SC should not be activist.

I just don't believe this. He is as activist on the issues he wants to pass as the rest.

IMHO, he and Thomas are part of the reason that America is on the decline.

[RA1]

All of the justices believe they are defending the Constitution. That is the basic job description. And, each one has an agenda.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest hitoallusa]

America will be on the decline if we can't tolerate others with different political views. Yes I think both Thomas and Scalia are intolerant and can't accept what other people have to say. Even if we somehow remove them from their seats there will be plenty of others who think as they do.

I just don't believe this. He is as activist on the issues he wants to pass as the rest.

IMHO, he and Thomas are part of the reason that America is on the decline.

[Lucky]

Speaking just for myself, I would have posted this in the forum for politics. There is no point having separate forums for subtopics if we don't honor them by posting there when appropriate.

[Guest zipperzone]

Speaking just for myself, I would have posted this in the forum for politics. There is no point having separate forums for subtopics if we don't honor them by posting there when appropriate.

Lucky - I agree with you but the trouble is that if it's posted in the politics form it will get far less readership.

[TotallyOz]

Right?

[Lucky]

Lucky - I agree with you but the trouble is that if it's posted in the politics form it will get far less readership.

That's absolutely right. I don't blame anyone for wanting their post to be read, but the Politics section is buried at the bottom of the site and that doesn't help either. I am one of the readers of political posts and I want to see them thrive. So maybe giving it more prominence will help get the posts read more.

[Lucky]

And speaking of politics, if the NY Times website can so easily be taken over by Syrian hackers, doesn't that make a joke of all so-called security programs the average Joe uses? The Times site went down yesterday and is still down.

[RA1]

I also was wondering why this was not in the politics forum but it isn't the first time, is it?

I have little good to say about Monsanto but I am pretty sure Justice Thomas did not get rulings in their favor all by himself.

Best regards,

RA1

[TotallyOz]

Guys it is pretty simple, I put it in this forum as the Supreme Court is supposed to be non political. Right?

[Lucky]

LOL! Oz proves that his sense of humor outdoes all of us!

[Guest hitoallusa]

Oh my Oz you must be exercising what's called site activism..

[TotallyOz]

LOL! Oz proves that his sense of humor outdoes all of us!

Thanks Lucky but I was being very serious. The SCOTUS is a non partisan group. We all know this. We know they interpret laws with no prejudices. I mean, don't they normally agree on all issues and thus why the mandates are handed down?

Oh my Oz you must be exercising what's called site activism..

LOL Too funny hito!

[TotallyOz]

Ginsburg to be first Supreme to officiate a same sex wedding.

http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2013/08/30/ginsburg-be-first-high-court-justice-performing-same-sex

[lookin]

We'll be married by Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

It's a day we will never forget.

We're inviting Scalia and Thomas,

But they'll both be too busy, we'll bet.

[Guest EXPAT]

This image is actually quite amazing if you think about it.

[Guest hitoallusa]

Aww they look so adorable together! Congrats..