Tue Feb 17, 2015, 12:40 AM
TomCADem (16,356 posts)
Calls increase for Ginsburg to recuse herself in same-sex marriage case
Source: MSNBC
As the nation awaits a Supreme Court hearing that many believe will establish a constitutional right for gay and lesbian couples to legally wed, a growing number of conservatives are calling for one of the most liberal justices on the bench to recuse herself. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) on Friday became the latest anti-gay group to demand that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg bow out of the upcoming hearing on marriage equality. Essentially, the group’s argument is that because the 81-year-old justice has already made her opinion on same-sex marriage clear, she should not be allowed to offer it in what will likely be a landmark civil rights case. But Ginsburg, legal experts note, is far from the only justice to hint at what that case will bring. Both Ginsburg, and Justice Elena Kagan — another member of the high court’s liberal wing — have presided at weddings for same-sex couples. And in an interview with Bloomberg Business last Wednesday, Ginsburg said that it “would not take a large adjustment” for Americans to get used to nationwide marriage equality. Those remarks were arguably based on facts. The number of voters who support same-sex marriage has steadily risen in recent years, according to Gallup, with 55% of poll respondents stating last May that they believed marriage between same-sex couples should be recognized as valid by the law. Read more: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/calls-increase-ginsburg-recuse-herself-same-sex-marriage-case Scalia can go duck hunting with Cheney, and there is no problem with Clarance Thomas's wife being an active member of the Tea Party. But, I guess a different set of rules applies to right wing men, then women who many would consider to be left of center at best.
|
38 replies, 6203 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
TomCADem | Feb 2015 | OP |
jberryhill | Feb 2015 | #1 | |
shraby | Feb 2015 | #1 | |
SunSeeker | Feb 2015 | #14 | |
underpants | Feb 2015 | #24 | |
VWolf | Feb 2015 | #26 | |
SoCalNative | Feb 2015 | #3 | |
Behind the Aegis | Feb 2015 | #4 | |
msongs | Feb 2015 | #5 | |
onecaliberal | Feb 2015 | #6 | |
SoapBox | Feb 2015 | #7 | |
Drunken Irishman | Feb 2015 | #8 | |
AtheistCrusader | Feb 2015 | #9 | |
azurnoir | Feb 2015 | #10 | |
Cha | Feb 2015 | #11 | |
pnwmom | Feb 2015 | #12 | |
BeanMusical | Feb 2015 | #13 | |
Exhibit A | Feb 2015 | #15 | |
Treant | Feb 2015 | #16 | |
paleotn | Feb 2015 | #17 | |
eggplant | Feb 2015 | #18 | |
DesertDiamond | Feb 2015 | #19 | |
Arkana | Feb 2015 | #20 | |
charles d | Feb 2015 | #21 | |
Yo_Mama | Feb 2015 | #22 | |
Adrahil | Feb 2015 | #23 | |
fredamae | Feb 2015 | #25 | |
MuseRider | Feb 2015 | #27 | |
uppityperson | Feb 2015 | #32 | |
MuseRider | Feb 2015 | #37 | |
RoBear | Feb 2015 | #28 | |
DeadLetterOffice | Feb 2015 | #29 | |
Gothmog | Feb 2015 | #30 | |
irisblue | Feb 2015 | #31 | |
Myrina | Feb 2015 | #33 | |
brooklynite | Feb 2015 | #34 | |
Corey_Baker08 | Feb 2015 | #35 | |
nichomachus | Feb 2015 | #36 | |
Dark n Stormy Knight | Feb 2015 | #38 |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 12:49 AM
jberryhill (62,444 posts)
1. What nonsense
First off, this case does not involve jurisdictions where same sex marriage is recognized. Performing a lawful a lawful act in such a jurisdiction has nothing to do with one's view of whether some other jurisdiction should be entitled to prohibit that act.
This is like saying a justice should be disqualified from opining on whether a state may ban Sunday alcohol sales because that justice once had a beer on Sunday where it is legal to do so. |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 12:49 AM
shraby (21,946 posts)
1. Some of the other justices have performed marriages also. Maybe they
should recuse themselves because they performed heterosexual marriages.
|
Response to shraby (Reply #1)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 03:15 AM
SunSeeker (43,369 posts)
14. HA! Love that!
![]() |
Response to shraby (Reply #1)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 09:55 AM
underpants (159,372 posts)
24. Clarence performed one of Rush Limbaugh's weddings
I'm not sure which category to put that in
|
Response to underpants (Reply #24)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 10:01 AM
VWolf (3,691 posts)
26. That would be an asexual wedding n/t
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 12:53 AM
SoCalNative (4,250 posts)
3. NOM should recuse themselves
from polite society, since they have no idea how to be a part of it.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 12:58 AM
Behind the Aegis (47,172 posts)
4. NOM can blow it our their collectives asses.
They smell the carrion of their dying movement. Sure, there will continue to be problems and yes, bigots like this will be there to remind us that LGBT equality is far from being achieved.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 01:10 AM
msongs (58,933 posts)
5. it's all about raising $$ from the haters, that's what NOM is concerned with nt
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 01:36 AM
onecaliberal (19,012 posts)
6. There is no way she should recuse herself.
Like Thomas did for healthcare when his wife was clearly working against it.
These people have no shame. Rock on Notorious RBG! |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 02:32 AM
SoapBox (18,791 posts)
7. NOM can eat shit...
They've become a real HATE group.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 02:35 AM
Drunken Irishman (33,951 posts)
8. NOM can nom on my nut sack.
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 02:39 AM
AtheistCrusader (33,982 posts)
9. And yet we all know how Scalia feels about it.
Funny they aren't railing about him.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 02:39 AM
azurnoir (45,850 posts)
10. well of course because I'm sure Scalia and Thomas
are laying awake nights struggling with how they'll vote
![]() |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 02:55 AM
Cha (268,396 posts)
11. They're brainwashed nuts.. Justice Ginsburg can recuse herself when
the fascist toads "recuse" themselves from cases they've voiced their very activist opinions on.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 02:57 AM
pnwmom (103,840 posts)
12. It is as nonsensical as the argument heard in a California case
that a Judge who's gay shouldn't be allowed to hear a marriage-equality case, because he might have a bias.
But under that reasoning a straight judge shouldn't be allowed to hear a marriage equality case, because he also might have a bias. The job of any Justice is to put his or her biases aside. And I'm sure Justice Ginsburg will do so. |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 03:14 AM
BeanMusical (4,389 posts)
13. Fuck NOM.
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 03:23 AM
Exhibit A (318 posts)
15. Ridiculous. n/t
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 03:26 AM
Treant (1,968 posts)
16. Not a crap is given this day
as to what NOM thinks.
Since Scalia's given speeches, I'd say Notorious RBG can recuse herself right after Nino does. And Thomas for his wife's involvement with the Tea Party. I'm not holding my breath. |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 07:33 AM
paleotn (9,377 posts)
17. Not only no....
...but Hell No! What an incredibly stupid argument.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 08:40 AM
eggplant (3,508 posts)
18. Fuck 'em. Lifetime appointments and all that.
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 08:54 AM
DesertDiamond (1,616 posts)
19. With the entire right wing of the SCOTUS having made clear for years their biases...
on all kinds of issues, NO WAY can they get away with this!
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 09:28 AM
Arkana (24,347 posts)
20. Ginsburg needs to give them the back of her hand.
Fucking Thomas wouldn't recuse himself during the ACA case, and Scalia can go duck hunting with Dicko the Sicko, but Ginsburg has to recuse herself? Fuck that shit.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 09:38 AM
charles d (99 posts)
21. Scalia Should Recuse Himself
Just say the Devil made you do it, Antonin!
![]() |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 09:43 AM
Yo_Mama (8,303 posts)
22. That's kind of ridiculous, IMO. The whole court has ruled on related questions.
Obviously they can't all recuse themselves.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 09:44 AM
Adrahil (13,340 posts)
23. Guess What?
![]() |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 10:01 AM
fredamae (4,458 posts)
25. NO FKG Way! Thomas
didn't...nay---Roberts/Thomas Ignored calls for Thomas to recuse when a Clear conflict re: the ACA and Ginny and Clarence Thomas was present.....
Isn't that the Real reason Weiner is Gone? Spring 2011 various news articles: http://www.wnyc.org/story/116920-anthony-weiner-budget-extension/ By June 2011: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthony-weiner-announces-resignation-from-congress/ Politicians have done Waaaay worse and are Still serving...Issa, Vitter etc...but Weiner..for all his flaws Was a Progressive Voice for 911 Responders, Vets and all the rest of us. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthony-weiner-erupts-at-republicans-for-rejecting-9-11-responders-health-bill/ |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 10:35 AM
MuseRider (30,788 posts)
27. Easy to fix.
You just take out every justice who has ever said that same sex marriage is OK with them and make them not vote. Then you take every justice who has said that they HATE it. HATE, HATE, HATE IT and let them decide because that is the only way this is fair.
Now come on America, if this makes sense to you then we are truly and surely done, enough so that we should all just close up shop. If this makes sense to anyone the argument is over because there is nothing left to be argued and the game has been played and the good guys lost. How the fuck this is even a story makes me want to crawl right back into bed and drink poison. |
Response to MuseRider (Reply #27)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 01:28 PM
uppityperson (114,790 posts)
32. hey, hi. and kick to op
Response to uppityperson (Reply #32)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 04:24 PM
MuseRider (30,788 posts)
37. Hi back!
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 11:03 AM
RoBear (1,188 posts)
28. Wow.
What a perfect shower of shit.
Thanks for your lines at the end, BTW. They put an immediate spin on the truth of the matters of men/women and of conservative vs. fair. Plan to share this with friends. |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 11:28 AM
DeadLetterOffice (1,352 posts)
29. That's just silly. Idiots. n/t
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 11:55 AM
Gothmog (91,187 posts)
30. These calls for recusal are weak
There is no basis for RBG to recuse herself
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 12:48 PM
irisblue (24,847 posts)
31. Like the Nortorious RBG cares...
![]() |
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 01:36 PM
Myrina (12,296 posts)
33. Oh how they would shit themselves if she did, and it still passed 7-1 (or 6-2)
The internal combustion would be a lovely sight.
|
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 01:46 PM
brooklynite (67,973 posts)
34. How does one group constitute "calls" plural?
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 01:52 PM
Corey_Baker08 (2,157 posts)
35. What Complete Bullshit....
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 04:12 PM
nichomachus (12,754 posts)
36. Then why not Thomas? He's spoken out against same-sex marriage. n/t
Response to nichomachus (Reply #36)
Tue Feb 17, 2015, 07:26 PM
Dark n Stormy Knight (8,593 posts)
38. There are so many times he should have recused himself, and the RW never had a problem with him
failing to do so.
|