Ginsburg apologizes for 'ill-advised' criticism of Trump

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's public regret Thursday for her criticism of Donald Trump appears to derive from an effort to extract herself from the heat of the presidential election just as it is likely to get hotter with the upcoming Republican convention. Legal scholars call it an unprecedented display of political punditry from a member serving on the nation's highest bench.

Promising to be more discreet in the future, the leader of the court's liberal wing said in a statement that judges should not comment on candidates for any public office. Absent a health crisis, though, one suspects that Ginsburg will do everything she can to make sure Donald Trump does not pick her replacement. "In the future I will be more circumspect.' And that's exactly how I feel about this whole business".

Ginsburg, the 83-year-old senior liberal member of the high court, inserted herself into the USA presidential election in recent days by making negative remarks about Trump in a series of media interviews. Mr. Trump, she said, "says whatever comes into his head at the moment" and has no consistency in his thinking.

"On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them", Justice Ginsburg said in a statement on Thursday. How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? Justice Stephen Breyer was questioned about Ginsburg comments, and he said that he would not express an opinion if he had it, referring to the current political scenario. She called her comments "incautious". He tweeted that Ginsburg was an embarrassment for making "very dumb political statements about me".

Ginsburg had drawn rebukes for calling Trump "a faker" and saying she didn't want to think about the possibility he might be elected.

"She has been more willing than her colleagues to talk about active controversies in public, which has frustrated a lot of conservatives", he said. "But. we expect them to put those opinions to the side, or at least not let those opinions override their judgment", Baker said.

While it's not surprising that the liberal justice, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1993, would be no fan of Trump, her harsh words were surprising coming from a sitting Supreme Court Justice. While Supreme Court justices are not held to that standard, the Post thinks they probably should be. "But they are not formally bound by the same rules that bind lower court judges".

Valve moves to shut down skin gambling on eSports platform
Sony: No decision made yet on 'Ghostbusters' in China