Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died.
This is a good time to observe reactions and take notes. You will find three general categories of response.
One group will be the Passionate. These people will speak with great enthusiasm for or against. Their emotions will drown out anything of value that they might add except for their kindred spirits who want even more. She will be portrayed as either Joan of Arc or your ex-wife. Unless you agree with them and want a rush, don’t waste your time.
Another group will be the Courteous. Many of us were told that if we could not say something nice we should not say anything at all. These people will increase their chance of stroke or heart attack trying to restrain themselves. For those who are into Latin, nolite detrahere de mortuis. Wikipedia tells me that means “Don’t speak ill of the dead.” I thought President Trump gave a good example of that when the press blind-sided him with the news of her death. They will not praise her but they will also be polite.
The last group will be the Factual. In their hearts they are trying to speak clearly, control their passion maintain a level of decorum. They have opinions but they are backed up by documented evidence. A good example of this is found at American Thinker. Andrea Widburg says that she read Ginsburg’s opinions when doing legal research. She goes into detail but if you don’t have time to read her article I think this sums it up.
“The worst thing about her decisions, though, was how she misused case authority to create new principles out of whole cloth. Nothing shows that more than in her determination to bypass our American Constitution and law and look to foreign constitutions, laws, and customs.”The “whole cloth” comment I would not be able to judge but the use of international law to trump the Constitution I was aware of in my non-legal reading.
As I opened I suggested taking notes. This is a good time to learn if you can rely on people’s opinions. One blogger that I have enjoyed reading had this to say,
“Though I disagreed with some of her decisions, she was passionate, honourable, articulate, and her legal decisions were well-thought.”I will continue to read what he has to say but will begin to question if he is of sound mind. There will be others. Most people writing are not emotionally involved. If I were reading a statement by a family member I would make allowances. Most people will be held to a higher standard in my world.
But who cares what I think?
homo unius libri