It is true that Justice Ginsburg developed a cult following. She was a strong advocate for legislating from the bench and not adhering to the Untied States Constitutional requirement that the court simply review and give opinions. Ginsburg believed like do so many of the left, that opinion means law.
Justices are required to take two oaths of office, unlike for instance the President of the United States who only takes one. The oaths taken by the Justices are as follows:
The first oath is, "I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
The second oath is, "I, _________, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."
In the second oath the justice specifically agrees to adhere to the constitution and laws of the United States. Justice Ginsburg stated several times that she believed our constitution was inadequate and that a Justice must use foreign influence and documents when reaching a decision.
Ginsburg claimed foreign and international law is appropriate for constitutional adjudication when she said: “Judges in the United States, after all, are free to consult all manner of commentary — Restatements, Treatises, what law professors or even law students write copiously in law reviews, and, in the internet age, any number of legal blogs. If we can consult those sources, why not the analysis of a question similar to the one we confront contained, for example, in an opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada, the Constitutional Court of South Africa, the German Constitutional Court, or the European Court of Human Rights?”
Ginsburg also showed her disdain for the United States Constitution when she advised a foreign country that she would not recommend the U.S. Constitution as a model for Egypt’s new government.
The problem, you see, is that the U.S. Constitution is “a rather old constitution.” Ginsburg suggested and you should look instead to the Constitution of South Africa or perhaps the European Convention on Human Rights. All these are “much more recent than the U.S. Constitution.”
This explains why so many of Ginsburg’s opinions seemed to be contrary to the United States Constitution like her upholding consistently Roe v Wade. She consistently violated her oath of office to adhere to the constitution and laws of the United States and applied laws from many different places including in some instances from outer space.
She is an icon to those who also hold the United States Constitution and our laws in disdain. John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” The American left hates our Constitution because it was written for a moral and religious people. The American left, including Justice Ginsburg, have embraced the doctrine of Karl Marx and his belief that a nation must abolish all long-standing principles (the Constitution), all morality, and all religion.
I understand that Justice Ginsburg was a friend of Justice Scalia. I understand that Justice Ginsburg was a witty and wonderful dinner guest to many. I understand that Justice Ginsburg was revered by such hypocritical movements as the Feminist and Me-Too movements. This does in no way change the fact that Justice Ginsburg violated her oath of office and tremendously damaged our Constitution.
Leave a Reply.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.