Forty Rod SASS 3935 Posted December 1, 2023 Posted December 1, 2023 She proved a lot of things to a lot of people. I liked her....a lot!
Rye Miles #13621 Posted December 1, 2023 Posted December 1, 2023 She was mostly on the conservative side of issues. Smart woman!
Dirty Dan Dawkins Posted December 1, 2023 Posted December 1, 2023 Aside from her position, I can’t recall anything notable about her.
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 Posted December 2, 2023 Posted December 2, 2023 3 hours ago, Dirty Dan Dawkins said: Aside from her position, I can’t recall anything notable about her. That's usually how it is with U.S. Supreme Court justices. That's what makes them famous, after all.
watab kid Posted December 2, 2023 Posted December 2, 2023 5 hours ago, Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 said: That's usually how it is with U.S. Supreme Court justices. That's what makes them famous, after all. thats the truth , if all would read the constitution and live by it we might all be happier but lawyers and judges get to "TWEEK" it , its them that should be tar and feathered and sent out on a rail , i do think the Supremes get it right more often than most tho - wish they couldn't turn anything down - a lot more would get solved
Subdeacon Joe Posted December 2, 2023 Posted December 2, 2023 16 hours ago, Dirty Dan Dawkins said: Aside from her position, I can’t recall anything notable about her. Which is exactly how it should be. Members of the Court aren't there to be noticed, to be famous, or to pander to the mobocracy of either side. A brilliant jurist, call her a "pragmatic constructionist" who pretty much held to the limits of the Constitution but realized, as did the founders, that no document could fully cover every possible event or situation. Her almost laser-focused opinions were clear and precise, one of her critics called her decisions something like "a ticket for one train ride." More important, she put her head down and got on with it. She didn't whine about things being "unfair" or 'oppressive" or being "held back by the patriarchy," she plunged ahead, knocking aside those roadblocks and not looking back. I can't say that I liked all of her decisions, but they were founded on reason, logic, and the Constitution rather than "empathy" or emotion.
Dirty Dan Dawkins Posted December 2, 2023 Posted December 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Subdeacon Joe said: Which is exactly how it should be. Members of the Court aren't there to be noticed, to be famous, or to pander to the mobocracy of either side. A brilliant jurist, call her a "pragmatic constructionist" who pretty much held to the limits of the Constitution but realized, as did the founders, that no document could fully cover every possible event or situation. Her almost laser-focused opinions were clear and precise, one of her critics called her decisions something like "a ticket for one train ride." More important, she put her head down and got on with it. She didn't whine about things being "unfair" or 'oppressive" or being "held back by the patriarchy," she plunged ahead, knocking aside those roadblocks and not looking back. I can't say that I liked all of her decisions, but they were founded on reason, logic, and the Constitution rather than "empathy" or emotion. Excellent response. I commend thee! Sadly, the liberal justices DO seem to get more notice as the media sympathetic to certain liberal causes trumpet how liberal justices will expand liberty in said areas. Conversely, these media outlets berate conservative justices for their perceived assaults on liberty to all fronts, in general.
Subdeacon Joe Posted December 2, 2023 Posted December 2, 2023 26 minutes ago, Dirty Dan Dawkins said: Excellent response. I commend thee! Sadly, the liberal justices DO seem to get more notice as the media sympathetic to certain liberal causes trumpet how liberal justices will expand liberty in said areas. Conversely, these media outlets berate conservative justices for their perceived assaults on liberty to all fronts, in general. Thank you! The more left leaning members of the Court, in general, get more notice because they, again in general, make more public statements than the conservative members. Thomas is an exception to that mostly because he is so often attacked by the Press. Scalia was also one often in the spotlight.
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 Posted December 2, 2023 Posted December 2, 2023 A good point to make here is that she referred to herself as the "first cowgirl to be appointed to the Supreme Court". She was the ranch-raised real thing.
Rye Miles #13621 Posted December 2, 2023 Posted December 2, 2023 50 minutes ago, Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 said: A good point to make here is that she referred to herself as the "first cowgirl to be appointed to the Supreme Court". She was the ranch-raised real thing. Yes! Arizona girl. appointed by Reagan!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.