Ruth Ginsburg’s Nomination
* As one of those who was privileged to witness the work of Ruth Bader Ginsburg as she and a handful of remarkable women built a framework of legal support for women’s equality in the 1970s, I find her selection to the U.S. Supreme Court nothing less than magnificent. She is a pragmatic visionary. She is dedicated to the most noble ideals of our legal system and her contribution to those ideals has been enormous.
President Clinton’s penchant for subjecting those whom he professes to respect to the Washington feeding frenzy before he abandons them is, at best, inhumane. It is sad that Ms. Ginsburg comes to the court by way of such an inelegant process, but the fact remains that she does come to the court. Her selection is a rare and valuable contribution to our nation of laws--in spite of the means by which he arrived at his superior decision. This is why I voted for Clinton.
DAVID HAMLIN
Los Angeles
* While I support fully the media’s “right to know,” and enthusiastically look forward to good reporting, there is always the issue of taste and decorum to be considered . . . even by the likes of Brit Hume. There is little doubt that his question to the President following the presentation made by Judge Ginsburg after her nomination ignored decorum, and that he deserved the tasteful kick in the butt he received from the President. Bravo, Mr. Clinton!
REISS J. DuPLESSIS
Carson
* Well, Bill has waffled once again and acting President Hillary still prevails. The women’s rights activists have been placated, the Jewish seat has been filled and the liberals have been satisfied.
Who will Billary choose next? An Asian? A Latino? Or the most qualified jurist, without consideration as to gender, race, religion or political persuasion--I think not!
JOHN D. GOLDSON
Rancho Mirage
* As a scholar in the areas of law and society and women’s legal history, I applaud Judge Ginsburg’s nomination and your praise of that nomination (editorial, June 15). However, your printing of Alan Dershowitz’s commentary (June 15) on the nomination cannot go unanswered. “Hatchet Job on Judge Ginsburg” would have been a more appropriate subtitle.
I have long suspected Dershowitz of some intellectual dishonesty; this suspicion is now amply confirmed by such a gratuitous, ad hominem attack on Judge Ginsburg. On behalf of those of us who live in the late 20th Century, let me not only assure Dershowitz that Ginsburg’s breaking down the barriers of sexual discrimination and harassment did not come “at a time when women’s rights were voguish and not life- or career-threatening” (if ever there has been such a time), but also point to his commentary as proof of the continued tenacity of those barriers. Apparently little has changed at Harvard Law School since Judge Ginsburg’s days, when women students were seen as taking valuable spaces away from male, and thus more deserving, students.
I will not further legitimate Dershowitz’s commentary by responding to its blatant sexism. Suffice it to say that The Times could have called on any number of serious scholars to provide real, substantive perspective, both pro and con, on the Ginsburg nomination, rather than pandering to such a media hound as Dershowitz.
DONNA C. SCHUELE
Lecturer, UC Santa Barbara
* Sometimes Dershowitz gets it right. And he sure hit a home run on the unfortunate, for America, nomination of Judge Ginsburg.
Knowing nothing about this judge, as soon as she spoke in the Rose Garden the specter of similar judges I have appeared before became to mind: picky, schoolmarmish lecturer, procedurist, fine-print scrutinizer, and above all by insinuation, someone who lacked fire in the belly, came to mind.
We sometimes misuse the term “unprincipled” when we describe zealots of the right or left merely because we disagree with them. Those very careful corporate or bureaucratic ambitious climbers to the top who “keep their noses clean” and watch their Ps and Qs are the real unprincipled ones. I don’t see a fighter for anyone else but the Ginsburg family in this nomination.
WILLIAM S. GREENE
Granada Hills
* If I had any qualms about Judge Ginsburg before, I no longer have. For one cannot get a better recommendation for the job of Supreme Court justice than Dershowitz, Mr. Super-Conceit, lowering himself to a vicious attack, which sounds more like a pretext. Who does he think he is? God? Who really is the “difficult person”?
To the students and faculty who heard me speak at Caltech last month about “Holocaust Implications for Today,” please forget I ever quoted Alan Dershowitz.
FRED BENJAMIN
Mission Viejo