Ginsburg, unprompted: "I would not arrest" Colin Kaepernick

[Leopolds Ghost]

Have you noticed that when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made this comment, she volunteered without being asked that some have apparently called for Kaepernick's arrest, and that she only mildly disagrees? The host did not ask her whether Kaepernick should be arrested. She apparently puts him on the same league as American citizens who advocate legally for ISIS -- as someone whose free speech rights are unfortunately protected.

Or for that matter political opponents of Donald Trump, defenders of Edward Snowden or Wikileaks. We are entering a dark time of fascism in the American country.

With more and more football players across the country refusing to stand for the national anthem before games, Justice Ginsburg called the protest “dumb and disrespectful.”

When asked by Couric how she feels about San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, and others athletes, refusing to stand for the anthem, Ginsburg replied, “I think it’s really dumb of them.”

“Would I arrest them for doing it? No,” Ginsburg elaborated. “I think it’s dumb and disrespectful. I would have the same answer if you asked me about flag burning. I think it’s a terrible thing to do, but I wouldn’t lock a person up for doing it. I would point out how ridiculous it seems to me to do such an act.”

Couric then asked, “But when it comes to these football players, you may find their actions offensive, but what you’re saying is, it’s within their rights to exercise those actions?”

“Yes,” said Ginsburg. “If they want to be stupid, there’s no law that should be preventive. If they want to be arrogant, there’s no law that prevents them from that. What I would do is strongly take issue with the point of view that they are expressing when they do that.”

Kaepernick has said that his bended knee during the national anthem before games is to protest wrongdoings perpetrated against African-Americans and other minorities in the U.S. The stance has outraged many — even President Obama has called it “messy.”

[yallerdawg]

1. "...take issue with the point of view that they are expressing..."

The issue:

"...wrongdoings perpetrated against African-Americans and other minorities in the U.S."

Yes - take issue with that. Or just take issue with the messengers.

Americans can sure be gutless cowards, can't they?

[ronnie624]

4. +1

She doesn't "take issue" with shit. She simply labels it "dumb", "stupid" and "arrogant". That's not a rational arguement. It's a classic logical fallacy.

It's not surprising, though. The current trend toward nationalism in the US, is very clearly meant to manufacture consent for our completely illogical GWOT.

[closeupready]

2. I'm inclined to give her a pass on this issue, because she's liberal most of the time

(if not all of it), in terms of how she votes, and also because it's not as if Kaepernick is a party to a case in front of the Supreme Court; that is, if he WERE such a party, Ginsburg would use her vast powers of decisionmaking to really look at every single bit of minutiae that led Kaepernick to protest in this manner, and when she came to a decision, it would be based upon a rock solid foundation of reason.

Yes, that's just me, but that's what I'm starting to think about this entire matter.

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. Yes, but why would someone volunteer that they "would not arrest" for kneeling at a sports ceremony?

What does it even have to do with free speech -- they are basically saying people have the narrowly-construed right to legally opt out of an apparently state-directed loyalty oath (which is what the flag ceremony was supposed to be in WWI during the time of the Red Scare and the Espionage Act) at a commercial sporting event. I found the HBO Real Sports show on the subject enlightening.

* and hence, not be arrested, despite the fact that what they are doing
is apparently considered by Justice Ginsberg to be a special class of speech.

** Or does she put it in the same class as disrespect towards religious symbols? But that doesn't make sense -- would any judge express that someone should "not be arrested" for disrespecting any other religious symbol? (not just civil religion / American Flag worship cult)

[closeupready]

6. It was an interview; I doubt she screened Couric's questions in advance.

So she probably brought up that point because in reading about Kaepernick's protest (and what other notable people were saying about it), she understood that many Americans who objected to his protest felt that he should have been arrested and imprisoned (even if most of them know that this would have been illegal).

So she was expounding on an ad-lib basis, not rendering a judicial opinion, in which judges frequently rule strictly on the arguments brought forth to them by the parties who are at odds, NOT ruling on what the parties COULD have argued, or ruling on what Bill O'Reilly or Rachel Maddow or anyone else is saying about it.

All just my armchair analysis, worth what you paid for it. Cheers.

[GeorgeGist]

3. White privilege is dumber, Ruth.

[Solly Mack]

9. And far more deadly.

[world wide wally]

7. Trump and his Russian Mafia is a much bigger threat to America than Colin Kaepernick

[NobodyHere]

8. Whenever someone says Kap is being disrepectful

The first thing pro-Kap supporters say is "Well that's his right".

I think Ginsburg is just pre-emptively answering that question.