US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg stunning announcement!

[Cabin4]

The only problem with these judges is their willingness to ignore our constitution. They should be "duty bound" to comply with the writings of the constitution and those writing s and debate that formed the constitution and declaration of independence. Strict construction should be the only authorized judging process. Otherwise, we will have allowed life appointed judges to inject their political views into cases that come before them.

There is something inherently wrong with a system that can allow a judge to violate their oath and never be impeached. Our laws around what these judges can and cannot do are too weak. The oath of office by itself is not strong enough anymore for judges, politicians and any other elected or appointed position.

[SHOOTALL]

funny thing about the court if if finds like i think its a good court if it finds like i don't like its a bad court ! Guess that's the reason they aren't voted for .

[Cabin4]

funny thing about the court if if finds like i think its a good court if it finds like i don't like its a bad court ! Guess that's the reason they aren't voted for .

There should be no "good" or "bad" judgments by a court because this implies personal judegments or public opinion not constitutional judgments. There should only be "right" and "wrong" court decisions. Right decisions are those founded in the constitution. Wrong decisions are those not based on the constitution. We already know Ginsberg is willing to violate her oath of office to decide using "wrong" principals. She is a disgrace to the high court and a buffoon that is willing to violate our constitution and the oath she took. Imagine the potential for anarchy in this country....people, business, politicians, etc, all make decisions that are supposed to be based on our constitution. If one of these makes a legitimate and sound constitutional based decision, an opponent can file a law suit to get it over turned based on their knowledge that there are judges willing to adjudicate in violation of the constitution! She should be impeached.

[SHOOTALL]

Cabin4 , you are correct with regard to "LAWS" but as i said they offer opinion and if it were cut and dry there would be no need to have them . Look only at abortion , i dare say the founding fathers never considered such in their day .
Do you think the weapons of today would have changed the minds of the founding fathers with regard to the 2nd amn. ?
The fact is the founding fathers fore saw that changes would take place is the reason for the Court and the checks and blances in general.
I do agree that political ambition has no place in the court but in todays world it does . Thank the great FDR for that as he was going to add justices in an effort to water down their power with justices more to his way of thinking .

[slim rem 7]

 it is scary that in matters of law.. the supreme ct.. has the final say.. always.. these are people with political agendas just like all politations.
 scary to me..slim