General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Dear Senator Dianne Feinstein: This is not about you. [View all]onenote
(42,829 posts)If her cancers were "near fatal" she must have had super human powers. During treatment for her first cancer, she didn't miss a day on the bench. Her second cancer, ten years later, was diagnosed in early February. She was back at work before the end of the month.
You are absolutely wrong to suggest that she was unable to perform her job full time during the period you claim she should have retired. Her health was fine from 2009 through 2014 (indeed, it was fine through 2018). She didn't miss a single oral argument during those years and maintained a very active speaking schedule. It was entirely reasonable for her to remain on the bench. Yes she had a recurrence in 2018, but the first time in her career that she missed an oral argument was in 2019; she was back at work less than month later having missed only six days of oral arguments. And, of course, by that point, she had every reason to think and hope that she be able to serve until after the 2020 election and, hopefully, a Democrat was in the White House.
I got to know her a bit during lawschool, when she was my professor in my Constitutional Law class and in a smaller Gender Discrimination class. This is before she became a judge. She was hard-nosed then and nothing about her suggested that she was into second guessing anything. But, as I said, no one can speak for the dead. Not me. Not you.
One nit. If you're going to post about Ginsburg, at least try to spell her name correctly.