What a great opportunity to explain again the difference in how institutions are defined and ho they operate. Ruth Ginsburg is a judge by definition and the Supreme Court is defined as a non political entity.

The supreme court consists of the most politically aggressive judges in the United States. Supreme court justices are not directly elected but they are politicians nonetheless.  The Supreme Court is what it is by definition but the Supreme Court justices are politicians who wear robes. They gain their appointments because they are the most likely candidates to carry out the political agendas of the president. There is nothing neutral or unbiased about any of the Supreme Court Justices.

The Supreme Court functions as a rolling constitutional convention, distorting the constitution according to their own political agendas. At least Ruth Ginsburg has become honest in her old age and is being honest about the function she actually serves.

The Supreme Court has no constitutional authority to decide the constitutionality of laws. This is a social convention that has pretty much destroyed the constitution.   Fantasize that these nine folks are God like entities but they operate with the same level of self interest as any other person.

Of all of the ideas on which the United States was founded, only the jury system  functions anywhere close to its expectation. The only way the U.S. Constitution will ever be of use to ordinary citizens is with a jury system whereby all laws would have to pass a constitutionality test, by a jury, before becoming active.

Views: 1