Partisan Divisions Are 'Not Serving Our Country Well,' Justice Ginsburg Tells Law Students
"I think it will take courageous people on both sides who care about the health and welfare of the country and who will say, 'Enough of this dysfunction,'" Ginsburg said.
September 12, 2019 at 06:56 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Thursday told a class of first-year law students in Washington that the partisan divisions dominating government today are "not serving our country well."
Ginsburg, appearing at Georgetown University Law Center, was responding to a student's question about how she might draw on her friendship with the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia—the justice's ideological opposite on the court—as a guide to bridge divides.
Ginsburg recalled the close working relationships between Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy and Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond when they were on the Senate Judiciary Committee even though they didn't agree on many issues. "It was even better," she added, when then-Democratic Sen. Joe Biden was chairman and Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch was ranking member.
"Some day we will get back to the way it should be," Ginsburg said. "I think it will take courageous people on both sides who care about the health and welfare of the country and who will say, 'Enough of this dysfunction.'"
Ginsburg began her appearance with a summary of the Supreme Court's decisions from last term and a preview of some of the cases that the justices will hear in the new term beginning Oct. 7. "I can safely predict the new term will have a fair share of closely watched cases," she said.
The court's new term includes major disputes about the scope of workplace rights for gay, lesbian and transgender employees, and the court is set to hear a case about whether the Trump administration can end an Obama-era program that let certain children of immigrants to remain lawfully in the country.
Other Trump-administration cases are in the lower courts, including disputes over whether the president can defy congressional subpoenas seeking copies of his financial records. A dispute over the Trump administration's effort to effectively ban asylum along the southern border could also reach the court this term.
Ginsburg's remarks at Georgetown come a day after she and Justice Sonia Sotomayor signed a blistering dissent that said the Trump administration should not be allowed to enforce an asylum ban along the southern border while a lawsuit is pending in California.
Ginsburg's recounting of the Supreme Court's major decisions from last term included the ruling that stopped the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census. Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. delivered the deciding fifth vote, aligning with the court's liberal members and drawing a fresh rebuke from some conservatives.
Roberts had been prepared to vote in favor of the U.S. Commerce Department, which oversees the census, but changed his vote, according to a new report from CNN. Roberts, according to the report, which cited anonymous sources, began to "waver" after oral arguments.
Ginsburg was asked various questions Thursday. Her strongest remarks came in response to a student who asked her what one thing she would add to the Constitution if possible.
"An equal rights amendment," Ginsburg replied. Sometimes, she said, she is asked why she cares about an equal rights amendment when the 14th Amendment equal protection clause serves the same purpose.
"I turn to my Constitution," she said, pulling out a copy. "I have three granddaughters. I can point to the First Amendment protecting their freedom of speech but I can't point to anything that says men and women are of equal stature before the law. I would like to say to my grandchildren that equal status of men and women is a fundamental premise of our system. I was a proponent of the equal rights amendment. I hope someday it will be put back in the political hopper and we'll be starting over again collecting the necessary states to ratify it."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTravis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part IV: Deliberations Begin in First Trump Criminal Trial
1 minute readJosh Partington of Snell & Wilmer Is in Fact a Rock Star in the Office (and Out of It)
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250