# When was the last time a Supreme Court Justice aired views publicly on a presidential candidate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 11, 2016, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658 "2016-07-11T15:17:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/181 "2016-07-14T14:36:47Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Stephen Gillers was my ethics professor. Mine too. A long time ago… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/182 "2016-07-14T14:41:30Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > She apologized. I’m sure Trump will accept her apology and state the matter is now closed as far as he is concerned. I admire your sense of humor. 😉 Good for her. That’s the best way to get this behind us so we can more easily move on to the next scandal. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/183 "2016-07-14T14:41:45Z")
She won’t need to recuse herself from anything. She will have to resign - you can’t sit on the Supreme Court from New Zealand. We can add a question to be asked of any future nominees - Senator on the Judiciary Committee: “Do you intend to abide by the judicial code of conduct? What do you think should be done if you or a colleague on the court violates that code?” Supreme Court nominee: “It depends - which party are we talking about?” Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![davidmich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@davidmich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidmich)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/184 "2016-07-14T15:23:06Z")
> [@Happy\_Lendervedder](#): > > Supreme Court justices going political is nothing new. I mean, for pete’s sake, Sandra Day O’Connor was at an election party where she announced that Al Gore’s victory was terrible. Then she cast a vote to make sure his election was overturned. > > And in 1800, [so many of the justices were actually out campaigning for John Adams, and the start of the Court’s session had to be delayed.](http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/ruth-bader-ginsburg-donald-trump-supreme-court-politics-history-214044) > > RBG expressing disgust in Donald Trump is nothing out of line, and frankly, like I said before, more people should be doing it. Everyone’s worried about Trump being a slippery slope to Hitler? Ridiculous. I’m more worried about this being the slippery slope toward President Camacho. Just as terrifying, much more likely. Thanks for that link Happy Lendervedder. That answers my question. Than you all. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/185 "2016-07-14T15:32:13Z")
“What should be done?” is kind of a silly question. And I’m sure 23 years ago when she was appointed she had no intention of someday slamming a Presidential candidate. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/186 "2016-07-14T15:41:39Z")
I’m not seeing that an off-hand comment in a private setting, like a party, is comparable to discussing presidential preferences for publication in international media. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/187 "2016-07-14T16:03:00Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I am. I’m saying if you’re so concerned about their conduct, put rules in place to enforce it. The Supreme Court makes their own rules. They are a co-equal branch of government. > [@](#): > > I’m also saying, start with the real poisonous stuff (e.g. obvious financial interests in cases before the SC) and leave the tone policing for later. The Justices already routinely recuse themselves in such cases. Although the SCOTUS doesn’t publically announce the reason for recusals, court watchers such as scotusblog have educated guesses when they do. So if Justice X has a financial interest in Corporation Y, and Corporation Y has a case before the Court, Justice X will recuse him or herself. “Justice X took no part in the consideration or decision of this case” is what they put in the ruling. Likewise, Justice Kagan recuses herself from cases she previously worked on as Solicitor General. None of this should be new information. ---
**Author:** ![Crybaby\_Boobie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crybaby_boobie/32/545_2.png) [@Crybaby\_Boobie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crybaby_Boobie)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/188 "2016-07-14T16:40:56Z")
> [@Happy\_Lendervedder](#): > > I’m more worried about this being the slippery slope toward President Camacho. Just as terrifying, much more likely. All things considered, President Camacho was a pretty good president, don’t you think? I mean he realized that there were problems, and tried to find the smartest guy around to fix them. He didn’t make it worse at least! I’d vote for him over Trump easily. ---
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/189 "2016-07-14T17:00:15Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > She apologized. I’m sure Trump will accept her apology and state the matter is now closed as far as he is concerned. It seems Trump is listening to professional advice now sometimes and might actually drop it, though surely his natural inclination would be not to. As to the apology, goes to show how you get the limb sawed off underneath you if you go all ballistic about this controversy as 'just the ‘hypocrisy of the right’, and ‘another fake scandal’… then the person ‘on your team’ has the good sense to apologize for what was obviously an inappropriate set of comments, especially to be repeated and amplified in more than one major media interview. Everyone already knew from previous in and outside the court comments how hard left Ginsburg is, just like they knew from similar comments by her intellectual nemesis, but apparently good friend, Scalia how far he was in the other direction. But he never made comments like she just did. She never did before herself either. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/190 "2016-07-14T17:18:51Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Oh, I agree about the non-hypocritical person standard, but the law is actually worded differently. And Ginsburg, unlike Thomas, left zero doubt about her partiality. Is it your assertion that none of the Justices who heard Bush v. Gore had any opinion about who they would rather have as president? Did none of them vote in that election? I agree that what she did was bad form, but I don’t think the fact that she had a preference for president makes her any different than any of her colleagues. Its just that they didn’t express them out loud. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/191 "2016-07-14T17:19:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now we have a Justice who herself directly (as opposed to inferentially via a spouse’s activity) has expressed a clear bias on an issue. Donald Trump is involved in an issue appearing before the Supreme Court? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/192 "2016-07-14T17:25:18Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Donald Trump is involved in an issue appearing before the Supreme Court? [Yoda] He will be. He _will_ be. [/Yoda] ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/193 "2016-07-14T17:25:35Z")
I’m not appalled by it at all. This whole “independent and impartial” judiciary thing has been a polite fiction for many years. I’ve said it in other threads, but if the justices are going to rule like partisan legislators, then they should air their opinions in the media and be voted upon by the public. ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/194 "2016-07-14T18:29:56Z")
It’s good that she apologized. For me, the issue all along was not whether what she did was inappropriate (it was), but whether Trump or any of his supporters were in any position to criticize it. Trump said of Ginsburg: “has embarrassed all by making very dumb political statements” Ha! He could be talking about himself (“Mexico sends all their rapists and criminals to the US”) It’s like someone who masturbates in public and being proud of doing that, and proud of not conforming to puritanical rules, and all his supporters are also proud of the fact that their candidate does not bow to the pressure of puritanical rules, and then someone else starts masturbating in public, and the original person starts complaining about all the masturbation in public. Yes, the rest of the people can complain about the second person’s public masturbation, but the original person and his fans have no say in the matter. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/195 "2016-07-14T18:56:30Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Not quite. What RGB did was ethically wrong\*, something someone in her position should not have done. Granted, she’s not technically obliged to follow the ethics code we’ve been discussing for all other judges, but she should be leading by example. > > Trump has certainly said a bunch of horrible things, but can you point to some code of ethics related to a candidate for the executive branch that he violated? His is a violate of decorum and “dignity of an aspired officeholder”, which just isn’t the same thing. > > Or, at least, the argument is that what she did was ethically wrong. What she did was probably not advisable, but it wasn’t unethical as you assert. It is unlikely that she will be deciding the outcome of a case over hanging chads – it could happen but it’s unlikely. And even if that happens, as others have already pointed out, you have Sandra Day O’Connor who was attending an election party and remarked about how bad it would be that Gore appeared to have won the election. And to top it off you have O’Connor and the outspoken and one of the most activist judges in Scalia asserting Court power, basically throwing a freaking presidential election to Bush. Nothing Ginsburg says will EVER outdo that. It’s a manufactured outrage, and I’m tired of having republicans blatantly violate decorum, ethics, and laws and then turn around and prosecuting progressives for the very same things that they do – often to a lesser degree. Ruth Bader Ginsburg has every right to be partisan if she wants to be. Again, whether it’s wise in terms of our political interests and hers is another matter. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/196 "2016-07-14T18:57:35Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I’m not appalled by it at all. This whole “independent and impartial” judiciary thing has been a polite fiction for many years. > > I’ve said it in other threads, but if the justices are going to rule like partisan legislators, then they should air their opinions in the media and be voted upon by the public. Precisely. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/197 "2016-07-14T19:01:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > She won’t need to recuse herself from anything. She will have to resign - you can’t sit on the Supreme Court from New Zealand. > > We can add a question to be asked of any future nominees - > > Senator on the Judiciary Committee: “Do you intend to abide by the judicial code of conduct? What do you think should be done if you or a colleague on the court violates that code?” > > Supreme Court nominee: “It depends - which party are we talking about?” > > Regards, > Shodan The Supreme Court doesn’t have a judicial code of conduct. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/198 "2016-07-14T19:10:21Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I’m not seeing that an off-hand comment in a private setting, like a party, is comparable to discussing presidential preferences for publication in international media. YMMV. You’re really reaching if you’re calling this misconduct or unethical. Fraternizing, going on a hunting trip with the Vice President and the subject of a case being decided by a Court, is actual conduct. Not just inflammatory speech, but **conduct**. RBG has expressed “regret” over her comments for the reasons that I thought she ultimately would: she realized that they were unwise and brought undue public scrutiny and pressure upon the Court, which affects all justices on the bench, not just her. But the actions of people like Scalia and Clarence Thomas (and his wife) have had similar effects, and were demonstrably worse than someone spouting off about current events and a public figure. She also probably got a phone call from Clinton and other friends from the DNC reminding her that it’s probably best not to make trump look like a victim when he is so easily cast in the role of a villain. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2016, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/199 "2016-07-15T03:12:53Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > You’re really reaching if you’re calling this misconduct or unethical. Fraternizing, going on a hunting trip with the Vice President and the subject of a case being decided by a Court, is actual conduct. That never happened. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2016, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658/200 "2016-07-15T03:22:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That never happened. Little more detail, please. That was how I remembered the controversy. Can you explain why the description is wrong? In my opinion, Ginsburg should have “non-apologized” for her statements. “I should not have called Trump a faker. It was wrong for me to say he is inept and incompetent. A Supreme Court Justice should avoid calling idiots out and should not expose fools for their folly. It was wrong of me to let people know how stupid he was.” etc. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-a-supreme-court-justice-aired-views-publicly-on-a-presidential-candidate/759658.md?page=11)