Help me understand something; Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the General Counsel for the ACLU (a well known left of center group).  She was confirmed by the Senate 97-3 in 1993, at that time the Dem's were in control of both houses and the Presidency.

 

She was on the US Court of Appeals for DC from 1980 to 1993.

 

She had a track record of being very liberal judge

 

Why then is it a good thing that Justice Ginsburg to be on the Supreme Court and such a bad thing for Judge Alito to be nominated?

 

Last time I checked the only "requirements" to be a Justice on the Supreme Court is that they must be nominated by the President and approved by the US Senate.  The US Constitution says NOTHING about the Senate being able to filibuster a judicial nomination.

 

Please tell me why a Liberal, like Ginsburg, can get a "free pass" but someone that is conservative (with "qualifications" at least as equal to the liberal) would be considered an evil force to the world?  Senator Schumer sings the praises of Justice Ginsburg but felt that now Chief Justice Roberts was too radical for the Supreme Court – I just love that double standard.  If Ginsburg is good for the court then there should be NO opposition to Judge Alito.

 

Now, I know I am bouncing around here; I don't have a problem with Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer being on the bench, they were appointed and approved in accordance to the law of the land. {I do not like how they rule in most of their decisions, mostly because they make our Constitution subservient to other legal documents, but that is how they feel they should judge.  I firmly believe that a Justice should interpret US law based on US Law, Starting at the US Constitution -- But I am a "Constitutionalist" and think that it should be applied as written.}  I believe that a nominee’s ideology should not be the sole deciding factor in a Senator’s approving or rejecting a Supreme Court nominee.  I believe that the Senators should look at the nominee’s background, their legal capacities, and their understanding of the US Constitution and the legal decisions that define the US Code.

 

Note: It was the "liberal" wing of the Supreme Court (Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer) that ruled in Kelo v. City of New London that eminent domain had no bearing if the private entity would be providing more tax revenue to the jurisdiction.