Ginsburg, Phony Arguments, Phony Refutations

[JMHACLJ at aol.com]

In a message dated 11/2/2005 10:25:44 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
DLaycock at law.utexas.edu writes:

But that service had clearly shown that she was no  judicial radical;  
Republican claims that they confirmed an extremist on  the other side because the 
President is entitled to choose are simply  phony.


This is a non sequitur.
 
Ginsburg served as a judge, among other things.  If Republicans claim  that 
her service as an appeals judge proves her to be an extremist, then it is  an 
objective claim subject to objective verification or rebuttal.
 
But if they claim she is an extremist based on her long time association  
with the ACLU, or because she had, for example, celebrated judicial  tyrannies 
like Roe v Wade, then perhaps the argument is not phony, or at least  is subject 
to some refutation different than mere invocation of her dutiful  service as 
an appeals court judge.  
 
Jim Henderson
Senior Counsel
ACLJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20051102/0a49226d/attachment.htm