I don’t see where “rich old white guys” matters what you are comparing to is “rich non-white females” if they are educated at the same schools by the same people and largely grew up with similar backgrounds.
Thomas and Barret have significantly different backgrounds than the other justices by way of life experience and education. KBJ is the same race as Thomas and both went to Ivy League Law Schools but have very different legal views. I think the more important factors are life experience and legal training not race/gender.
There’s a false narrative that if someone isn’t the “most qualified” then they’re inadequately qualified and DEI is giving a free pass to someone inadequately qualified. If there are several appropriately qualified candidates for membership in group in a public role, isn’t it appropriate to take into consideration for that group to reflect the cross-section of the people they represent?
That’s why they built in the process for amending the Constitution. If it’s something that didn’t exist back when it was written, then SCOTUS shouldn’t be applying protections now based on it.
I agree with the first point - not being the “most” qualified doesn’t mean that someone isn’t qualified at all. But as I said, when Biden said he wants to appoint a black woman, and that is one of his pre-requisites, then it’s DEI.
So does that mean a DEI hire is bad? Because that’s how the term is being used, that she was just handed the job due to her gender and race. Do you think her appointment was inappropriate? Given the fact that the Supreme Court represents the American people, isn’t it appropriate to place value on having someone who can reflect or represent that perspective if they are appropriately qualified for that role?
A few weeks ago, Trump had, er, “Truthed” a statement saying that he had reached an agreement with Putin for Gershkovich and others being held in Russia on questionable charges to be released the day after election day if Trump won.
It was just coincidence that the only qualified SC justices happened to be old white guys until 1967. Ditto major party presidential and VP candidates until 1984.
Ends justifying means and all that.
She may have been qualified, and her appointment isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It’s the process that had an issue, and Biden’s perspective on it. You shouldn’t only look at a specific group based on sex and color to get your prospective appointees.
As far as the demographics of the country, I don’t think it’s relevant for SCOTUS.
Do you know how the pool of candidates was obtained? Were qualified candidates obtained, then further sorted by race and gender? Or were only Black female candidates collected? Maybe the pool of appropriately qualified candidates is so large that there’d be numerous Black women included. I don’t know the process.
My understanding is that Gorsuch has a more informed, distinct take on issues regarding Native Americans compared to the rest of the court based on where he grew up. Having a variety of backgrounds does help the court.
I’m having to watch a lot of Peacock with commercials.
I long for the olden days when I could FF or skip through commercials with that old technology: TiVo.
Peacock does not allow FF’ing.
