Updated: Ginsburg Falls Asleep During Texas Redistricting Case

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

The subject matter was extremely technical, and near the end of the argument Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dozed in her chair. Justices David Souter and Samuel Alito, who flank the 72-year-old, looked at her but did not give her a nudge.

Warning: The rest of the article is highly misleading. Oral argument went relatively well for Texas today, and the Court, as a body, said nothing like the headline claims. Justice Kennedy just asked a question and made a comment concerning the issue. Huge difference, but that's the liberal media for you.

Found here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060301/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_texas_redistricting;_ylt=Aok_EtLOyKoxWiD3R5 L4uZus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

Court artist's sketch:

[cerberus]

So what? Clarence Thomas regularly sleeps during oral arguements. I personally have seen it.

[Riverboat]

The best we can hope for is that she'll sleep through the entire decision-making process.

[Republican_Legion]

So what? Clarence Thomas regularly sleeps during oral arguements. I personally have seen it.

Jee sorry we offended you by making fun of your favorite scotus judge.

[cerberus]

Who said she was my favorite?

[Native American]

She's may be next in line for being replaced by President Bush.

With 3 years still to go in his term of office, it's possible Bush could get to appoint as many as 4 new justices to the Supreme Court. Which would be nice, especially with both South Dakota and Mississippi passing legislation to ban abortions!

[DesertFox]

Ruth is my favorite airheaded mouse. With those lips she could suck a persimmon raw. Er, raw persimmon. She could eat lime on the half shell. She could down lemons in the nude.

Broad got some serious mouselips.

[Lazarus]

HAHAHAHA... Hush, Fox... You're gonna wake her up... :D

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

I've updated the first post with a sketch done by the court artist.

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

Also, she slept for nearly 15 MINUTES.

[Native American]

She may have heart problems.

Let's hope President Bush gets to make her replacement soon, and not have to wait until 2007 or even 2008 to do so!

[Longhorn_Platinum]

cerberus:
So what? Clarence Thomas regularly sleeps during oral arguements. I personally have seen it.

:moo: I don't care, as long as he votes to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

[Republican_Legion]

:moo: I don't care, as long as he votes to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Oh and I would fall asleep too if I had to listen to Souter/Ginsburg talk for hours.:grin:

[The_Elucidator]

She may have heart problems.

Let's hope President Bush gets to make her replacement soon, and not have to wait until 2007 or even 2008 to do so!


She has heart problems for sure...she doesn't have one! The space in the chest cavity where the heart would normally go is stuffed with a bunch of crumpled ACLU, un-planned parenthood flyers.

[Riverboat]

So what? Clarence Thomas regularly sleeps during oral arguements. I personally have seen it.In any case, a sleeping Clarence Thomas is still better-prepared for argument than a wide-awake Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg.

[Warlady]

I've never ever heard that Clarence Thomas sleeps through arguments. Nor has the media ever reported it to my knowledge. I've also never seen a court artist draw a picture of him sleeping. Sour grapes perhaps? When you start falling asleep during the job it's time to move on.

[DeclinetoState]

Interesting discussion at John Lott's blog (http://johnrlott.tripod.com/2006/03/justice-ginsburg-falls-asleep-during.html).

[DeclinetoState]

Ah, here it is: irrefutable proof that Thomas sleeps while hearing arguments.

:sheeple: (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x968213#969609)

[cerberus]

I've never ever heard that Clarence Thomas sleeps through arguments. Nor has the media ever reported it to my knowledge. I've also never seen a court artist draw a picture of him sleeping. Sour grapes perhaps? When you start falling asleep during the job it's time to move on.

Maybe, maybe not. Thomas hates oral arguments and finds them useless. He's asked less then five questions during his entire time on the SCOTUS bench, and as I've said, I've seen him napping during arguments.

[Republican_Legion]

Maybe, maybe not. Thomas hates oral arguments and finds them useless. He's asked less then five questions during his entire time on the SCOTUS bench, and as I've said, I've seen him napping during arguments.

Wheres your 'proof' troll ?

Link ?

[cerberus]

I saw it first hand, I was there. Believe it, don't believe it, it happened either way. You want me to put it up on my blog so you can have your precious 'link'? As for him hating oral arguements and not asking questions, that's basically common knowledge. You look it up, I'm not doing your research if you're going to be a jerk about it.

[Wyatt_Junker]

I saw it first hand, I was there. Believe it, don't believe it, it happened either way. You want me to put it up on my blog so you can have your precious 'link'? As for him hating oral arguements and not asking questions, that's basically common knowledge. You look it up, I'm not doing your research if you're going to be a jerk about it.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. -Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. <!-- / sig -->

[Wyatt_Junker]

Killing for peace is like whoring for virginity.


I love this one too.

I bet the WW 2 vets, no... make that 'whores', would agree. Good one Ghandi!

[ANI]

I actually wish that she would nap a little more...especially when important issues come before the court.

[Venus de Smilo]

So what? Clarence Thomas regularly sleeps during oral arguements. I personally have seen it.
Oh. You've been inside the USSC during oral argument?

:hahaha:

[cerberus]

Oh. You've been inside the USSC during oral argument?


Yes I have.

[Warlady]

Sorry cerberus but some of us find THAT hard to believe. Irregardless why throw back with "Well Clarence Thomas sleeps too" blah blah blah. Even if it is true it doesn't make it right. Why defend Olive Oil with "he did it too. He did it too. He did it too." The nananana poo poo defense doesn't work here.

[ThomasIsUnderrated]

As for him hating oral arguements and not asking questions, that's basically common knowledge.

Yes, Justice Thomas doesn't ask many questions during oral arguments. That's a well-known fact. Nothing negative should be infered from that fact, because Justice Thomas has explained why he doesn't like asking lots of questions.

1. English was not his native tongue, so he grew up being shy about speaking it, even though he'd think in English.

2. He prefers to let the advocates actually speak during oral arguments. The current practice of the other justices goes something like this:


Advocate: Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court. This case is about...

Justice Stevens: Don't you think your position on X is a radical expansion of our precedent?

Advocate: Well, with all due respect, your honor, if I may explain my argu...

Justice Breyer: Let me ask you this hypothetical. Let's say a transexual over the age of 18 but under the age of 26 commits a crime with a firearm while holding a badger in his right hand and dancing a jig. Now, under the precedent of Silly v. Dick, doesn't the second tier of the seven prong test created by Justice O'Connor apply to that situation only if the person with him at the time of the incident was going to skin the badger?

Advocate: *Stunned silence*

Justice Ginsburg: Adding to Justice Breyer's question...

Advocate: *Faints*

[EveningStar]

Sorry cerberus but some of us find THAT hard to believe. Irregardless why throw back with "Well Clarence Thomas sleeps too" blah blah blah. Even if it is true it doesn't make it right. Why defend Olive Oil with "he did it too. He did it too. He did it too." The nananana poo poo defense doesn't work here.

If Thomas had napped the media would have fallen all over themselves to report it.

[cerberus]

Sorry cerberus but some of us find THAT hard to believe. What, that I was there or that Thomas was napping?

Irregardless ....is not a word....
why throw back with "Well Clarence Thomas sleeps too" blah blah blah. Even if it is true it doesn't make it right. Why defend Olive Oil with "he did it too. He did it too. He did it too." I was just pointing out that people who loathe Ginsburg and love Thomas shouldn't be so quick to throw stones when the fact is one of there own does it as well. People are quick to believe the worst about someone they dislike but won't apply the same standards to their favorites, but you are correct, that doesn't make it right; neither of them should be napping.
The nananana poo poo defense doesn't work here.
Odd because so many people on this board use it in reverse when its convenient (the "But Clinton did it" defense being an ever popular variant).

[Rhino]

As much as I hate to agree with cerberus, he has a point.

[EveningStar]

(the "But Clinton did it" defense being an ever popular variant).

I think "the Democrats did it too" is Rush's main argument these days. :(

[Venus de Smilo]

Yes I have.
I don't believe you. What case was being argued? When did this occur? Why were you there?

[cerberus]

I don't believe you. What case was being argued? When did this occur? Why were you there?
Fine, don't believe me. It was 1998. I don't remember the case name. I was there because I wanted to see SCOTUS oral arguments. You do know they are open to the public, don't you?

[Wyatt_Junker]

Yes, Justice Thomas doesn't ask many questions during oral arguments. That's a well-known fact. Nothing negative should be infered from that fact, because Justice Thomas has explained why he doesn't like asking lots of questions.

1. English was not his native tongue, so he grew up being shy about speaking it, even though he'd think in English.

2. He prefers to let the advocates actually speak during oral arguments. The current practice of the other justices goes something like this:


Advocate: Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court. This case is about...

Justice Stevens: Don't you think your position on X is a radical expansion of our precedent?

Advocate: Well, with all due respect, your honor, if I may explain my argu...

Justice Breyer: Let me ask you this hypothetical. Let's say a transexual over the age of 18 but under the age of 26 commits a crime with a firearm while holding a badger in his right hand and dancing a jig. Now, under the precedent of Silly v. Dick, doesn't the second tier of the seven prong test created by Justice O'Connor apply to that situation only if the person with him at the time of the incident was going to skin the badger?

Advocate: *Stunned silence*

Justice Ginsburg: Adding to Justice Breyer's question...

Advocate: *Faints*

Good point there Underrated.

We all know that these 'questions' aren't really questions at all, but attempts at grandstanding and ego boosting.

I actually admire Thomas for remaining silent. His ego does not precede his mouth.

And if we really admit it to ourselves, there is no learning to be done in such cases and nothing gained from the pretend inquiry, cliff note version. We already have our preconceptions. There is no more enlightenment at the end of a case than at the start. They have already been briefed. Any flair or fireworks in the courtroom I'm assuming is a product of glorywhoring.

[Venus de Smilo]

Fine, don't believe me. It was 1998. I don't remember the case name. I was there because I wanted to see SCOTUS oral arguments. You do know they are open to the public, don't you?

Well, if you were really there, you'd remember the case, the lawyers, and something more significant than what Justice Thomas was doing. But perhaps you're telling the truth. Maybe Justice Thomas had his eyes closed because you were there.