Donald Trump's list of feuds is a long and distinguished one. He has sparred with the Republican Party establishment. He has suggested George W. Bush was partially to blame for 9/11. He has tussled with the pope, for crying out loud.
As of this week, he can add a Supreme Court associate justice to the list.
As I noted Monday, legal minds have been questioning whether Ginsburg should have said what she said about Trump over the weekend, and what it means for her ability to decide future cases involving the presumptive GOP presidential nominee.
Two days in, the feud is growing, with Ginsburg doubling down — and Trump suggesting she vacate her seat.
After The Fix and others noted the unusual nature of Ginsburg's comments Monday, she didn't back off. Trump, she told CNN late Monday, is a "faker."
"He has no consistency about him," she said. "He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. ... How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that."
Trump, unsurprisingly, wasn't going to let it all go.
"I think it’s highly inappropriate that a United States Supreme Court judge gets involved in a political campaign, frankly,” he told the New York Times's Maggie Haberman. “I think it’s a disgrace to the court and I think she should apologize to the court. I couldn’t believe it when I saw it.”
Trump added: "It’s so beneath the court for her to be making statements like that. It only energizes my base even more. And I would hope that she would get off the court as soon as possible."
As I noted Monday, in the legal sense this is breaking new and significant ground; justices generally don't weigh in on political issues — and especially presidential politics. There really is no direct precedent that we could find. The questions it raises about a justice's public comments have led to plenty of debate, with passionate opinions on both sides.
As for the 2016 election, though? It's hard to see what impact it might have. Trump is already broadly disliked — by as many as 7 in 10 Americans. Despite his feuds with everyone from Pope Francis to Republican heavyweights, he still won the GOP primary, though he did tarnish his image among the broader electorate in the process.
So it's somewhat hard to believe that a liberal Supreme Court justice going after him — at her own behest, it bears noting — would help or hurt his already-poor numbers. Per the polls, if you're reading this you may well have a pretty strong opinion about Trump by now. You may love him. You may hate him. But at this point, you are unlikely to be swayed by anyone else's take.
Ginsburg has indeed amassed a reputation as a hero of the left. She has earned plaudits for her willingness to speak out to the media on various issues progressives care about and for weighing in on things other justices won't.
Among the broader electorate, though, she's become a polarizing figure.
A poll from Democratic-leaning automated pollster Public Policy Polling last year showed 36 percent of Americans approved of her, while 29 percent disapproved. While many Supreme Court justices are unknown to Americans, 65 percent offered an opinion about Ginsburg, who appeared to be the second most well-known justice among survey respondents.
And even as Democrats love her, there are limits to her appeal. While 55 percent of Democrats had a favorable opinion of her and 8 percent had a negative one, Republicans were split the other way: 51 percent negative and 15 percent positive. Independents were split — 33 percent favorable versus 31 percent unfavorable.
Ginsburg was cited by 19 percent of people as their favorite justice — a testament to her cult following. But she was also rated the least-favorite justice of 12 percent — the second-most of any justice, behind Clarence Thomas.
What's clear is that Ginsburg is comfortable with her decision to break new ground for a justice by publicly feuding with a presidential candidate. And she looks like she'll keep doing it, even if it comes with some potential pitfalls.
Either Ginsburg is just so exasperated by Trump that she can't help but speak out, or she thinks what she's doing is helping. Perhaps she simply thinks an unprecedented campaign by a Supreme Court justice to criticize a presidential candidate will draw attention that other feuds might not.
But if that's the case, it's not clear what a liberal Supreme Court justice could do to hurt Trump that he hasn't already done to himself.