So far we have the media pundits, various Republican politicians and the Pope who have all ended up apologizing or backtracking negative comments made about Donald Trump. After being hit by both the liberal press and Republicans alike, it seems that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsbug has had some time to think over her impetuous comments.
If I win the Presidency, we will swamp Justice Ginsburg with real judges and real legal opinions!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 13, 2016
BREAKING: Ginsburg says she regrets comments on Trump.
— The Associated Press (@AP) July 14, 2016
So has Ruth finally come around to Donald Trump and is all of the sudden a neutral party in our country’s highest legal system?
I highly doubt it. More likely she resigned to the backlash from the populace and decided to head off the topic before it went any further. With the unpredictable nature of this year’s presidential election, it wouldn’t be out of the realm of possibility that the choice for president comes down to 1 state with a close call. The case could very well end up going to the Supreme Court for a decision. A decision that may be the deciding factor in who our country’s next leader is. Although unlikely, if that situation comes to fruition, Ruth Bader Ginsburg should definitely recuse herself from the court’s decision.
The New York Times reports:
Earlier this week, Justice Ginsburg called Mr. Trump “a faker” who “really has an ego” and said he had been treated too gently by the press. Mr. Trump, she said, “says whatever comes into his head at the moment” and has no consistency in his thinking. She also made critical remarks in interviews with The New York Times and The Associated Press.
“On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them,” Justice Ginsburg said in a statement on Thursday. “Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect.”
The brief statement was a rare, public admission of fault by a member of the Supreme Court, an institution which jealously guards its traditions and almost never acknowledges missteps in the conduct of the justices.
It also came at a dramatic moment in the presidential campaign, with Mr. Trump preparing to name his vice-presidential pick on Friday and then, next week, formally accept the Republican party’s nomination. The clash between a presidential candidate and a sitting Supreme Court justice is certain to further roil an already raucous campaign.
Mr. Trump had lashed back at the justice in recent days, and she was also criticized in editorials and by legal ethics experts.
“I think it’s highly inappropriate that a United States Supreme Court judge gets involved in a political campaign, frankly,” Mr. Trump said in a telephone interview with The Times on Tuesday. “I think it’s a disgrace to the court, and I think she should apologize to the court. I couldn’t believe it when I saw it.”
Few legal experts had expected Justice Ginsburg to offer the apology that Mr. Trump demanded. Justices typically remain largely out of the public eye and are insulated from political pressures and news media coverage that can compel action.
But the torrent of criticism, especially from supporters and allies of Justice Ginsburg, appears to have pierced that protection.
Former Justice Antonin Scalia, who died this year, was often the target of demands for apologies for his acerbic comments from the bench or in speeches. They generally did not materialize, though the justice did apologize to reporters in 2004 after a deputy federal marshal ordered them to destroy recordings of a half-hour speech by Justice Scalia at a Mississippi high school.
Correction: July 14, 2016 An earlier version of this article stated incorrectly the year in which Justice Antonin Scalia apologized to reporters after a deputy federal marshal ordered them to destroy recordings of a half-hour speech by Justice Scalia at a Mississippi high school. It was 2004, not 2014.