Don't bury Ruth Bader Ginsburg yet
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg underwent surgery today for removal of a small tumor associated with "apparently early stage pancreatic cancer," the U.S. Supreme Court announced. She's 75.
So, here comes the following email to North Carolina media:
"Many of you have now heard that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg has been hospitalized for pancreatic cancer, the fourth deadliest cancer you can get.
"She is our only female justice and, if she were to leave would certainly touch off a major national conversation about President Obama’s first vacancy.
"This note is simply to notify you that NARAL Pro-Choice North Carolina or NARAL Pro-Choice America are available for comment regarding these developments."
Good grief. The woman is still in the recovery room and NARAL is ready to jump into a debate about abortion politics on the Supreme Court.
Justice Ginsburg, I wish you a full and speedy recovery.
The politics can wait for another day.
Comments (6)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
She may not be dead but she sure looks like a corpse -
Posted on February 5, 2009 3:18 PM
Not nice. She isn't having a good day.
Posted on February 5, 2009 3:23 PM
At least we know where she stands.
Posted on February 5, 2009 4:01 PM
The timing is poor to discuss SCOTUS appointments, but it is, of course, an important nation-shaping appointment for any President. I wish Justice Ginsburg the best and serving well into her 80s (as she told her law clerks she wanted to do) but I am intrigued as to what kind of justice-nominee the President might appoint. Aren't you?
Posted on February 5, 2009 5:02 PM
I am, but language like "fourth deadliest cancer you can get" and "if she were to leave" is insensitive and impatient.
Given this reportedly is pancreatic cancer in its early stages, and that Justice Ginsburg is receiving the best possible treatment, her chances of survival might be quite good.
It is likely that Obama will have the responsibility of appointing a Supreme Court justice during his first term, and the White House legal staff should be considering candidates. But to go into full-bore speculation -- and, if I can guess at NARAL's motivation -- lobbying on account of today's medical news is inappropriate.
Posted on February 5, 2009 5:13 PM
I think the country would be served to have a 5th vote on the Court to send the abortion issue back to the states. This issue is dividing us as Americans and allowing the corrupt two Party oligarchy to rule over us and spend us into bankruptcy. Let's remove this hot button issue from national politics and start to view our candidates for who they are and not so much by their stance on Roe v. Wade. I am very passionate about the abortion issue but I also believe it is being exploited by both sides of the aisle as a wedge issue and that we should be appointing our justices based on their knowledge and of the Constitution not their political stances on certain social issues.
Posted on February 6, 2009 7:44 AM