quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo54:
This will take some of the mystery out of her visit to the hospital.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...eHUg?ocid=spartanntp


Jim

Ruth Bader Ginsburg treated for tumor on her pancreas: court spokesman

I hope she lives for two more years. Maybe three.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo54:
This will take some of the mystery out of her visit to the hospital.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...eHUg?ocid=spartanntp


Jim

Ruth Bader Ginsburg treated for tumor on her pancreas: court spokesman

Fox has it headlined as a malignant tumor on the pancreas.

But by all means Ruth, don't retire so you can stick it to conservatives while you sleep at the bench.

Wouldn't want to do the important shit like spend time with family, or just relax and chill for your remaining years.

It's not like life has given you the chance to do so time after time.

I feel pretty confident the Ginsberg's spokesperson is not telling near the whole story. I fear that the Justice has metastatic pancreatic cancer and the folks at Sloan-Kettering Hospital are treating the new lesions as they show up.....i.e. the lung nodules, and now a pancreatic mass. A brain and bone scan might reveal some most interesting findings.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
Rather surprising, but RBG and Scalia were pals. Lunching together, etc.

Why is this surprising? Have we become so uncivil that we can’t socialize and dine with people of opposing viewpoints and politics?

At what point does she become unfit. Being ate up with cancer, one might not make the most rational of choices.

But hey, she gets to die doing what she loved.

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
Rather surprising, but RBG and Scalia were pals. Lunching together, etc.

Why is this surprising? Have we become so uncivil that we can’t socialize and dine with people of opposing viewpoints and politics?

Some have. We've seen it all over. I don't think pipe smoker was saying that it's a surprise RBG and Scalia were pals, I think he may have been saying it's unusual to see given today's political environment.

quote:

Have we become so uncivil that we can’t socialize and dine with people of opposing viewpoints and politics?

According to the left "we" are unfit for society. How many republicans or people who support or work for the president been driven from or harrassed at restaurants?

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:

quote:

Have we become so uncivil that we can’t socialize and dine with people of opposing viewpoints and politics?

According to the left "we" are unfit for society. How many republicans or people who support or work for the president been driven from or harrassed at restaurants?

Do you ascribe that to RBG?

Apparently Scalia did not.

My reply has nothing to do with her. It has to do with the question posed.

Lawyers on the forum please correct me if I am wrong. My reading on the subject indicates that Justices are only removed by resignation, death, or conviction causing impeachment. Specifically, mental or physical incapacitation has ZERO impact if they won't step down. I read that there was a multi year period where a Justice was suffering dementia, wouldn't step down, and the other 8 justices agreed to set aside any decisions where he was the deciding vote.

Hard to believe, capacity isn't enough of a concern to address.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:

quote:

Have we become so uncivil that we can’t socialize and dine with people of opposing viewpoints and politics?

According to the left "we" are unfit for society. How many republicans or people who support or work for the president been driven from or harrassed at restaurants?

Assaulting someone who is eating is not the same as eating with someone who is different.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
My reply has nothing to do with her. It has to do with the question posed.

You seem to be saying that because some (all?) lefites think we are "unfit" that we are justified in shunning them in general. Perhaps I misunderstand you, but I think we should take each lefty as they come. Some are civil, and can be tolerated in polite company. Others are too obnoxious.

How long till a youtuber posts a video explaining how Jeffrey Epstein was kidnapped and is being harvested for parts for RBG?

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Lawyers on the forum please correct me if I am wrong. My reading on the subject indicates that Justices are only removed by resignation, death, or conviction causing impeachment. Specifically, mental or physical incapacitation has ZERO impact if they won't step down. I read that there was a multi year period where a Justice was suffering dementia, wouldn't step down, and the other 8 justices agreed to set aside any decisions where he was the deciding vote.

Hard to believe, capacity isn't enough of a concern to address.

The only way to remove a justice who is alive is to impeach. No one knows whether mental incompetence or bad health is a ground for impeachment as it has never happened. "Good behavior" is the standard, which most wouldn't normally read to include a requirement of good health, or even good mental acuity.

You are thinking of William Douglas who had a stroke. He stayed on the Court for another year, and was finally persuaded by Justice Abe Fortas to retire. They did defer cases where his vote might have mattered.

Others have been disabled while serving, and it has been handled in various ways.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Lawyers on the forum please correct me if I am wrong. My reading on the subject indicates that Justices are only removed by resignation, death, or conviction causing impeachment. Specifically, mental or physical incapacitation has ZERO impact if they won't step down. I read that there was a multi year period where a Justice was suffering dementia, wouldn't step down, and the other 8 justices agreed to set aside any decisions where he was the deciding vote.

Hard to believe, capacity isn't enough of a concern to address.

The only way to remove a justice who is alive is to impeach. No one knows whether mental incompetence or bad health is a ground for impeachment as it has never happened. "Good behavior" is the standard, which most wouldn't normally read to include a requirement of good health, or even good mental acuity.

You are thinking of William Douglas who had a stroke. He stayed on the Court for another year, and was finally persuaded by Justice Abe Fortas to retire. They did defer cases where his vote might have mattered.

Others have been disabled while serving, and it has been handled in various ways.

Better answer is, the court is not going to remove her regardless what happens to her. She could fall into a coma for the next 10 years and the court would simply ignore the issue until she finally kicked off.

And it was asked a few posts back "at what point does she become unfit"? That point is a hundred miles in the rear view mirror. She sleeps through SOTU addresses and other affairs, she missed a large part of the last session of SCOTUS due to health issues, my bet is she hasn't written or even collaborated with her staff on any of the opinions published under her name in the past several years. She's nothing more than a liberal figurehead at this point who 'knows' that seat belongs to 'her', not the American public. As such, she'll be dead two weeks before anyone hauls the body out of her chambers. Her death is the only way we rid ourselves once and for all of RBG.

...tick, tock...

Tests to see if she’s still human?

She is obviously trying to keep the chair warm, hoping Trump gets replaced in the next election. Republicans would probably be doing the same thing.
My non-professional medical understanding is that older people with pancreatic cancer can live as long as it's encapsulated and when it finally bursts its over. I don't know if this is from the pancreatic cancer, one of the others she's had or something new.
Not a fan of her politics but as a fellow human being I'm sorry to hear of anyone going through this.
She's had a relatively long life and reached the top of her profession.

quote:

posted August 23, 2019 04:35 PM Hide Post
Lawyers on the forum please correct me if I am wrong. My reading on the subject indicates that Justices are only removed by resignation, death, or conviction causing impeachment. Specifically, mental or physical incapacitation has ZERO impact if they won't step down. I read that there was a multi year period where a Justice was suffering dementia, wouldn't step down, and the other 8 justices agreed to set aside any decisions where he was the deciding vote.

That is my recollection. I believe it was Justice Douglas.