Get
my
name
outta
your
mouth.
(Photo
by
MANDEL
NGAN/AFP/Getty
Images)
The
late
Supreme
Court
Justice
Ruth
Bader
Ginsburg
was
not
a
fan
of
Donald
Trump.
Like,
famously,
the
pair
did
not
get
along.
And
well
before
she
died,
Trump
was
already
salivating
at
the
prospect
of
filling
her
Supreme
Court
seat,
reserving
it
for
the,
ahem,
notoriously
anti-choice
pick
of
Amy
Coney
Barrett.
It
was
a
cruel
irony
that
RBG
died
months
before
Trump
was
ejected
from
the
White
House,
and
Republicans
rushed
through
Barrett’s
nomination.
All
of
which
would
ultimately
culminate
in
the
Supreme
Court’s
overturning
the
right
to
reproductive
freedom,
ushering
in
a
new
American
era
of
increased
infant
deaths
and
a
spike
in
maternal
mortality
rates.
So
it’s
pretty
weird
that
a
conservative
political
action
committee
named
after
the
Notorious
RBG
would
support
Trump,
and
even
more
bizarrely
claims
that
RBG
and
Trump
were
of
“one
mind”
on
abortion
rights.
What
in
the
shit
did
I
just
watch?
Are
they
really
doing
this
just
for
clout?
There
seems
no
other
colorable
justification.
But
who,
exactly,
is
fooled
by
this?
The
PAC’s
website
goes
even
further:
“Why
did
Ruth
Bader
Ginsburg
agree
with
Donald
Trump’s
position
on
abortion?
Because
RBG
believed
that
the
federal
government
shouldn’t
dictate
our
abortion
laws.
Donald
Trump
also
does
not
support
a
federal
ban
on
abortion.
On
this
issue,
great
minds
think
alike.”
Madiba
Dennie
at
Balls
and
Strikes
details
the
thin
veneer
of
a
justification
given
by
the
PAC:
On
its
website,
the
RBG
PAC
justifies
its
claims
about
Trump
and
RBG’s
common
ground
with
screenshots
of
two
headlines—a
2020
New
York
Times
piece
titled
“Why
Ruth
Bader
Ginsburg
Wasn’t
Fond
of
Roe
v.
Wade”
and
a
2013
NBC
article
titled
“Liberal
Justice
Ruth
Bader
Ginsburg
says
Roe
v.
Wade
Went
Too
Far.”
But
these
headlines
are
conveniently
divorced
from
all
relevant
context.
Ginsburg
recognized
that
the
Constitution
protects
the
right
to
abortion.
Her
“disagreement”
was
not
about
substance,
but
about
strategy:
Roe,
Ginsburg
said
in
1984,
“presented
an
incomplete
justification
for
its
action”
because
its
reasoning
centered
the
physician
rather
than
the
patient,
thus
failing
to
fully
recognize
that
“a
woman’s
autonomous
charge
of
her
full
life’s
course”
hangs
in
the
balance.For
Ginsburg,
abortion
was
a
matter
of
equal
protection
and
freedom
from
sex-based
discrimination.
By
relying
instead
on
privacy,
she
believed,
Roe’s
protections
were
weaker
than
they
should
have
been.
The
PAC
also
conveniently
misconstrues
Trump’s
position
on
reproductive
freedom.
While
he’s
said
the
words
that
he
doesn’t
support
a
“federal
abortion
ban,”
his
campaign
has
used
other
words
that
amount
to
the
same
thing.
And
it
ignores
the
Project
2025
plan
to
use
the
Comstock
Act
of
1973
to
severely
limit
access
to
abortion
care
in
this
country.
And
RBG’s
granddaughter,
Clara
Spera,
is
pretty
pissed
about
it,
saying,
“The
RBG
PAC
has
no
connection
to
the
Ginsburg
family
and
is
an
affront
to
my
late
grandmother’s
legacy.”
Continuing,
“The
use
of
her
name
and
image
to
support
Donald
Trump’s
re-election
campaign,
and
specifically
to
suggest
that
she
would
approve
of
his
position
on
abortion,
is
nothing
short
of
appalling.”
Spera
noted
her
grandmother
“was
a
champion
for
the
equality
of
women
and
specifically
tied
the
right
to
abortion
to
women’s
freedom
and
ability
to
participate
in
society,”
and
contrasted
RBG’s
position
on
reproductive
freedom
with
the
former
president’s,
“Donald
Trump
gloats
about
his
part
in
overturning
Roe.
He
is
a
direct
threat
to
reproductive
liberty
and
equality.”
And
that’s
not
the
only
person
deeply
disturbed
over
the
PAC’s
cynical
cooption
of
RBG,
as
reported
by
Jezebel:
Reproductive
Freedom
for
All
(formerly
NARAL),
called
RBG
PAC
“a
calculated,
shameless,
last-minute
attempt
to
lie
to
voters
about
Trump’s
stance
on
abortion—one
of
the
most
salient
issues
of
this
election.”
The
organization’s
president,
Mini
Timmaraju,
said
RBG
PAC
is
“incredibly
insulting
and
underscores
how
concerned
the
GOP
is
about
their
record
on
abortion.
And
they
should
be.”
The
RBG
PAC
was
created
two
weeks
ago
—
filing
its
FEC
paperwork
at
the
deadline
for
this
election
cycle.
The
group
has
almost
$20
million
in
secret
donor
funds
to
spend
before
election
day,
so
be
prepared
to
be
blitzed
by
this
shady
as
shit
message.
But
know
that
in
every
way
that
counts
it’s
an
absolute
lie.
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@[email protected].