Magnanimous that a great word for Chicken sht republicans.
No, it just means they’re late to the game of making SCOTUS confirmations political. Most of the entire history of nominations has been apolitical. It’s primarily within the last 35-40 years it’s all about using the court as a political body.
Someone being fair minded might shrug and say sure I don’t agree with Ginsburg, but she’s brilliant and can administer the law fairly. She gets my vote.
It used to be that on air journalists were fair and neutral in the way they handled their guests. You’d never guess that Tim Russert was a die hard liberal. He kept that to himself. I once talked to Sam Donaldson on his radio show - he didn’t agree that you had to show neutrality; you just had to be fair.
Inserting personal bias is something a judge should never do. When they’re grilled before Congress and asked how they will rule on this or that, it’s a grievous violation of jurisprudence to answer in any way. A fair judge will rule in accordance with what is presented. Like a referee or umpire, it doesn’t matter who you think should win - your job is to decide according to the rules.
Judicial activism ignores that. They believe they can sit in judgment ABOVE the law, and decide as they BELIEVE it SHOULD be.