Justice Ginsburg sounds off on an issue pending before the Supreme Court. Amazing impropriety.http://m.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/398455/ginsburgs-astounding-indiscretion-ed-whelan …
@justkarl @testandverify Yes, a point on which @gabrielmalor and I both think both sides are ridiculous about:https://twitter.com/chrisgeidner/status/566349108160778240 …
-
-
@chrisgeidner Yup. Just people with no knowledge or experience of recusal obligations stirring up resentment.@justkarl@testandverify -
@gabrielmalor@chrisgeidner@testandverify If I read RBG correctly, she probably didn't violate Canon 2, but pretty close to it. -
@justkarl@chrisgeidner@testandverify She said nothing about the legal issues before the court. She can make social commentary. -
@gabrielmalor@chrisgeidner@testandverify As I'm sure you would be thrilled if Scalia had done the same on the same issue. -
@justkarl@chrisgeidner@testandverify I, on the other hand, am consistent across the spectrum. -
@gabrielmalor@chrisgeidner@testandverify As am I, but apparently in disagreement with you on this point. -
@justkarl@chrisgeidner@testandverify I got a lot of recusal experience when I was clerking. The majority of such requests are crap. -
@gabrielmalor@chrisgeidner@testandverify Indeed they are. Which is why I said that recusal wasn't required.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.