While the late Justice Ginsburg's statements about the NFL protesters are troubling, those statements are clearly outweighed by Ginsburg's life long commitment to civil rights and racial equality. Again, Neymar's argument lacks perspective.
An excerpt from a Ginsburg's speech in 2009 is an example of her commitment:
THE VALUE OF DIVERSITY: RUTH BADER GINSBURG'S 2009 KEYNOTE SPEECH
I would have upheld both University of Michigan programs and wrote in dissent in the undergraduate school case: “Actions designed to burden groups long denied full citizenship stature are not sensibly ranked with measures taken to hasten the day when entrenched discrimination and its after effects have been extirpated.” “If honesty is the best policy,” I added, the undergraduate school’s transparent “affirmative action program is preferable to achieving similar numbers through winks, nods, and disguises.”
Four years after the Michigan University cases, the Court divided 5 to 4 again, this time on the constitutionality of lower school programs in Seattle, Washington and Louisville, Kentucky—programs designed to keep kindergarten through 12th grade classes racially integrated despite the high degree of neighborhood separation along racial lines. To maintain integration, the cities’ school boards took race into account in assigning children to particular schools. The Court held the programs unconstitutional. Unlike the University of Michigan law school program, the Court said, race in the lower school plans was “decisive by itself.” Moreover, the Court added, the Michigan case involved “considerations unique to higher education.” The lead opinion ended with an attention-riveting line: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
The four dissenters—I was one of them—saw the Seattle and Louisville plans differently. There is a “legal and practical difference,” we said, “between the use of race-conscious criteria . . . to keep the races apart, and the use of race-conscious criteria . . . to bring the races together.”https://www.sciencespo.fr/en/news/news/the-value-of-diversity-ruth8239bader-ginsburgs-2009-keynote-speech/5051
While LBJ did not pass an civil rights legislation, he did sign civil rights into law and it cannot be credibly argued that LBJ did not push Congress to pass civil rights legislation
LBJ Champions the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Just five days after John F. Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, Lyndon B. Johnson went before Congress and spoke to a nation still stunned from the events in Dallas that had shocked the world.
Johnson made it clear he would pursue the slain President's legislative agenda—especially a particular bill that Kennedy had sought but that faced strong and vehement opposition from powerful southern Democrats.
"No memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kennedy's memory than the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long," Johnson told the lawmakers.
Then, serving notice on his fellow southern Democrats that they were in for a fight, he said: "We have talked long enough in this country about equal rights. We have talked for one hundred years or more. It is time now to write the next chapter, and to write it in the books of law."https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2004/summer/civil-rights-act-1.html
y04185 suggests that Ruth Bader Ginsburg saying the NFL Players protest showed contempt for a Country that has afforded them so much opportunity is racist but when Trump called the protesting NFL players SOBs, he declined to opine whether the comment was racist.
Clearly, y04185 has a double standard when evaluating so called racist statements by Democrats and so called racist statements by Republicans. y04185's argument is intellectually dishonest, disingenuous and lacks substance.