Author Topic: Biden's choice for the SC  (Read 4944 times)

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Biden's choice for the SC
« on: January 27, 2022, 09:56:00 AM »
So before he has actually nominated anyone some Republicans are calling his nominee a ultra liberal who wants to kill babies, punish white people and take away your guns.

Well that may be a bit of hyperbole at this time but it is going to happen.

So who do you think he is going to choose? And how easily will this nominee get through the process?

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2022, 10:08:28 AM »
I expect him to appoint Kamela Harris.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2022, 11:08:04 AM »
So before he has actually nominated anyone some Republicans are calling his nominee a ultra liberal who wants to kill babies, punish white people and take away your guns.

Well that may be a bit of hyperbole at this time but it is going to happen.

So who do you think he is going to choose? And how easily will this nominee get through the process?

Hasn't he already said his decision would be based on the person's race and sex? That should narrow the potential choices down a bit.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #3 on: January 27, 2022, 11:09:45 AM »
Nominee will get railroaded through, following the playbook of the Republicans with Barrett. No matter who they are. All they have to do is appease Joe Manchin, who will demand a moderate and a pony and a king cake.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #4 on: January 27, 2022, 12:25:35 PM »
Nominee will get railroaded through, following the playbook of the Republicans with Barrett. No matter who they are. All they have to do is appease Joe Manchin, who will demand a moderate and a pony and a king cake.

I'm sure Democrat Leadership will completely ignore this but, It was Lawrence Tribe, Advisor to Joe Biden, who argued just a bit more than a year ago under Trump that the Senate President could not break a 50/50 tie for a Supreme Court Nomination.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/notable-quotable-tribe-voting-vice-president-supreme-court-justice-breyer-retirement-biden-appointment-harris-11643236691

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2022, 12:33:10 PM »
Nominee will get railroaded through, following the playbook of the Republicans with Barrett. No matter who they are. All they have to do is appease Joe Manchin, who will demand a moderate and a pony and a king cake.

I'm sure Democrat Leadership will completely ignore this but, It was Lawrence Tribe, Advisor to Joe Biden, who argued just a bit more than a year ago under Trump that the Senate President could not break a 50/50 tie for a Supreme Court Nomination.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/notable-quotable-tribe-voting-vice-president-supreme-court-justice-breyer-retirement-biden-appointment-harris-11643236691


Oh my! Can anyone image a politician changing thier views on something when it suites them or worrying about being seen as a hypocrite....
Were only 'outraged' when it happens against a issue we care about.  Not like we hold the politician accountable for being a hypocrite.... if we did we might have to look at ourselves. Better to avoid looking in a mirror, especially in my case, as its not a pretty sight.

Ephrem Moseley

  • Members
  • Pacifist Fascist
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2022, 12:36:51 PM »
I expect him to appoint Kamela Harris.
That is who Trump should have appointed just to screw with everyone.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2022, 12:39:00 PM »
Nominee will get railroaded through, following the playbook of the Republicans with Barrett. No matter who they are. All they have to do is appease Joe Manchin, who will demand a moderate and a pony and a king cake.

I'm sure Democrat Leadership will completely ignore this but, It was Lawrence Tribe, Advisor to Joe Biden, who argued just a bit more than a year ago under Trump that the Senate President could not break a 50/50 tie for a Supreme Court Nomination.

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/notable-quotable-tribe-voting-vice-president-supreme-court-justice-breyer-retirement-biden-appointment-harris-11643236691

Sure. Just as I'm sure that Republican leadership will forget that Pence cast a tie breaking vote in the appointment of a circuit court judge.

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2022, 12:44:41 PM »
Kamala Harris or Michelle Obama (not that she'd want it)  Which would mess with the GOP more?

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2022, 12:46:23 PM »
Or Maryanne Trump Barry (too old but ironic).

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2022, 12:54:30 PM »
Well, what would mess with the GOP more? Hillary. Their demon nine years after exiting politics, owned by China, committed to the New World Order, abetter of pedophilia, eater of souls.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2022, 01:09:56 PM »
Well, what would mess with the GOP more? Hillary. Their demon nine years after exiting politics, owned by China, committed to the New World Order, abetter of pedophilia, eater of souls.

No no, the plan is clearly to appoint Harris to SC, then fill the vacant VP slot with Hillary and then Biden will resign making Hillary the first female President of the United States.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2022, 01:15:21 PM »
If Biden really does follow through with appointing a black female he has really done that person a dis-service.  She would have been nominated because she is black and female, not because she was the best candidate or necessarily even a decent one. 

In fact. if she is the best, Her hard work and accomplishments will have been for nothing.  The only important achievement to the left is possessing a black vagina.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2022, 01:17:51 PM »
Is there only one best candidate then?

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #14 on: January 27, 2022, 01:19:01 PM »
Objectively, yes, there should be.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #15 on: January 27, 2022, 01:25:45 PM »
What a load of crap.  If there was always just one objectively obvious choice, we would not even need the Senate to approve them.

Who gets to make the criteria to say "objectively" this person is the best? 

I mean if you do not like how someone decides the law you can say they are not qualified. But that is just you. Other people who agree with the way they decide the law think that they are qualified.

I mean were Kavanaugh and Barret the obvious best choices?

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #16 on: January 27, 2022, 01:36:08 PM »
Donald Trump.  Keeps him out of the 2024 election and he will not live very long.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #17 on: January 27, 2022, 01:46:27 PM »
What a load of crap.  If there was always just one objectively obvious choice, we would not even need the Senate to approve them.

Who gets to make the criteria to say "objectively" this person is the best? 

I mean if you do not like how someone decides the law you can say they are not qualified. But that is just you. Other people who agree with the way they decide the law think that they are qualified.

I mean were Kavanaugh and Barret the obvious best choices?

Nobody said it needs to be obvious who the best candidate is.  But a president appointing a Supreme Court Justice should look at the candidates Legal Opinions, experience and professional qualifications and choose the one that would make the best Justice.  I concede it might not be obvious or even easy to make a distinction between two or three highly qualified candidates.     But that is where the President needs to use his Judgment.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #18 on: January 27, 2022, 02:16:14 PM »
If we limit choice to active Federal Judges then there are a bit less than 1800, if we include law professors, a bit less than 15,000 more.  If we include experienced law practictioners (10+ years experience) probably over 1/2 of US lawyers - about 650,000.

Probably a list of 100's is provided and narrowed down to 20 or so, and then those get major background checks and 2 or 3 finalists are considered.

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #19 on: January 27, 2022, 02:23:29 PM »
Quote
But a president appointing a Supreme Court Justice should look at the candidates Legal Opinions, experience and professional qualifications and choose the one that would make the best Justice.

Sounds great but this is totally subjective.  Biden's best choice is obviously not the same as Trump's choice.  Legal opinions and experience are also unequal.  Anyone who has ever hired someone from a large pool of applicants knows that there are times when your choice is a guess between several great candidates.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #20 on: January 27, 2022, 03:10:35 PM »
Quote
But a president appointing a Supreme Court Justice should look at the candidates Legal Opinions, experience and professional qualifications and choose the one that would make the best Justice.

Sounds great but this is totally subjective.  Biden's best choice is obviously not the same as Trump's choice.  Legal opinions and experience are also unequal.  Anyone who has ever hired someone from a large pool of applicants knows that there are times when your choice is a guess between several great candidates.

You left out a whole bunch of stuff. How long will the person be able to serve, for one thing. The objective most experienced legal minds are probably the oldest. Lately things have been trending to nominate judges who have participated in fewer opinions rather than more. How it will boost your party's support. The knock on effects of how the judiciary is viewed, particularly by people of color. Someone who will be able to introduce a different perspective into what questions are asked of petitioners.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2022, 05:04:05 PM »
But a president appointing a Supreme Court Justice should look at the candidates Legal Opinions, experience and professional qualifications and choose the one that would make the best Justice. 

Or alternatively, start with the color of their skin and genitalia!

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2022, 05:10:00 PM »
The medium is the message

so board - I need to get a life

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2022, 07:58:59 PM »
Or alternatively, start with the color of their skin and genitalia!

That has been the usual practice.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2022, 08:09:39 PM »
Maybe. I do give Biden credit for being the only one with the stones to say it out loud tho.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #25 on: January 27, 2022, 08:45:27 PM »
As left as possible, and as young as possible!

The right long since stopped pretending appointments to the SC were anything other than a naked power grab.  Just a matter if the left -- and centre, and centre-right, frankly -- trouble to show up to try and stay in the game.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2022, 10:18:46 AM »
As left as possible, and as young as possible!

The right long since stopped pretending appointments to the SC were anything other than a naked power grab.  Just a matter if the left -- and centre, and centre-right, frankly -- trouble to show up to try and stay in the game.

Did you miss the part about Joe Manchin? He's not going to accept some kind of ultra-lib.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #27 on: January 28, 2022, 10:55:34 AM »
Funny sad that when the other Men were selected its assumed that they were the best qualified without any other bias involved.

Representation and being qualified are not mutually exclusive 

Then again the left does love the symbolic gesture over substance so I understand the concern.
Then again the right does love winning over substance so I understand the concern.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #28 on: January 28, 2022, 11:21:43 AM »
In reality, Biden likely had Supreme Court picks largely decided before he was elected.  It was almost certain that Breyer would be retiring and so planning ahead would be expected.

So if he knew already who his pick(s) were - then stating the race and gender would just be stating something he already knows about his pre-screened candidates, rather than setting them as a criteria.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2022, 11:27:50 AM by LetterRip »

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #29 on: January 28, 2022, 11:51:24 AM »
As usual its poor commination by the Dem's as they just don't get it.  Their is no need to qualify the selection statement other then we determined that Person X is best qualified for the position.
That in thier deliberations representation was given weight to best qualified didn't have to be communicated in the way they did.     
They could have just named the name and let the press do the rest, but then virtue signaling - look how good we are. The Dem's just don't get it.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2022, 12:32:50 PM »
In reality, Biden likely had Supreme Court picks largely decided before he was elected.  It was almost certain that Breyer would be retiring and so planning ahead would be expected.

Not only this, given its importance I'm sure both parties have extensive flowcharts and lists of who could move to the SC, with plans years ahead.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2022, 02:03:01 PM »
On the one hand I'm sure a lot of qualified people who are not black women are a bit disappointed that they won't even be considered for the job, but on the other hand they must all be just a little bit happy that they won't have their time wasted under false pretenses that they have snowball's chance down under of getting it.

There's an awful lot of that in the workplace and especially with government jobs where they already know who they will hire, often the specific person but even when not the person by name they already know generally what that person will look like, or as often as not what that person will not look like, but by law they are required to go through the motions of considering all qualified candidates. It's so refreshingly honest of Biden to dispense with all of that formality and just tell America that if you are not a black woman then don't even think about because it's not going to happen.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #32 on: January 28, 2022, 02:09:56 PM »
Except they are not applying for a job opening. They are being selected. And Biden can use whatever criteria he wants in his selection.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #33 on: January 28, 2022, 02:17:03 PM »
Do we really think anybody's cabinet picks, ambassador picks, or really any appointments are about MERIT?!!

It seems they are usually about who donated a lot of cash, who endorsed them, who will agree with them, and who they can control.

Do we think that Ben Carson was the top person available to run HUD? Or that Xavier Becerra was best qualified to run HHS?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #34 on: January 28, 2022, 02:26:13 PM »
Well I agree. A lot of times there is the illusion in government and the corporate world too that people are applying for job openings when the reality is that somebody has already been selected for that position and none of those others should have been basically lied to so as to have gotten their hopes up as if they ever had a chance.

So it's nice in this case that it's put out in the open by President Biden in no uncertain terms that the selection criteria is very well established to be based first and foremost on genitalia and skin color.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #35 on: January 28, 2022, 02:35:22 PM »
Do we really think anybody's cabinet picks, ambassador picks, or really any appointments are about MERIT?!!

It seems they are usually about who donated a lot of cash, who endorsed them, who will agree with them, and who they can control.

Do we think that Ben Carson was the top person available to run HUD? Or that Xavier Becerra was best qualified to run HHS?

The Supreme Court is very different from those other appointed positions.   As far as I can tell, Merit has always been of high importance when appointing federal judges and especially Supreme Court Justices.  Got help us if that ceases to be true.


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #36 on: January 28, 2022, 03:00:40 PM »
Barrett was the most qualified jurist. Got it.  ;D

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #37 on: January 28, 2022, 03:03:12 PM »
And Kavanaugh.  Oh right, even Trump thinks he was not qualified when he rules against Trump.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #38 on: January 28, 2022, 03:34:24 PM »
Barrett was the most qualified jurist. Got it.  ;D

Oh, and lest I be branded a partisan, Kagan was exceedingly unqualified in my opinion. She had NO judicial experience prior to her appointment. But then, neither was Rehnquist. I think generally it is probably good to have been a judge before being appointed for life to the highest court.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #39 on: January 28, 2022, 04:41:28 PM »
So if he knew already who his pick(s) were - then stating the race and gender would just be stating something he already knows about his pre-screened candidates, rather than setting them as a criteria.
Probably.  But I don't understand the logic of announcing it in those terms either.  Unless they calculation is that it outrages the right so much -- OMG REVERSE RACISM AND MISANDRY -- that it pops some veins or ups covid risk factors sufficiently to swing some close midterms, even before he gets to the name.  Or conversely, it's a "breaking the sticker shock to them gently" consideration, if you want to read it entirely the other way.

As left as possible, and as young as possible!

The right long since stopped pretending appointments to the SC were anything other than a naked power grab.  Just a matter if the left -- and centre, and centre-right, frankly -- trouble to show up to try and stay in the game.

Did you miss the part about Joe Manchin? He's not going to accept some kind of ultra-lib.
Did you miss "as possible", even while quoting it?  There's a reason I didn't say "as left as imaginable", or "as left as theoretically possible".

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #40 on: January 28, 2022, 04:52:20 PM »
Most people don't say "as tall as possible" and then say 5'6" is fine. Dems will be lucky not to wind up right of Roberts.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #41 on: January 28, 2022, 04:55:14 PM »
Well I agree. A lot of times there is the illusion in government and the corporate world too that people are applying for job openings when the reality is that somebody has already been selected for that position and none of those others should have been basically lied to so as to have gotten their hopes up as if they ever had a chance.

So it's nice in this case that it's put out in the open by President Biden in no uncertain terms that the selection criteria is very well established to be based first and foremost on genitalia and skin color.

Actually the criteria was about representation. that a organization that reflects current society make  is better able to make decisions good for everyone. That the foolish Dems use the language of gender and color when they mean is beyond me.  IMO when that language is used it comes off as racist even if with the best intentions, They ought to know better but I have serious doubt they will, not when the immediate gratification of virtue signaling is so pleasing to the ego. So out of touch, the majority of those leaning to the left hate that crap...

The debate could have been if representation should have the weight its given in determining best choice.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #42 on: January 28, 2022, 05:53:04 PM »
Most people don't say "as tall as possible" and then say 5'6" is fine. Dems will be lucky not to wind up right of Roberts.
Height is rarely referred to as The Dimension of the Possible.  See Bismarck, LBJ, and countless others.  It should go without saying.  It should especially go after I explicitly did say it, but equally I should have suitably lowered expectations by now.

Talking of expectations, on the likely result I'll freely stipulate I have very little idea.  538 opines that "That means that even Manchin and Sinema have 100 percent track records of supporting Biden’s judicial nominees," and even suggests it's not wildly improbable that up to about three Republicans might.  (Two "moderates", one "throwback", in their analysis.)  But I can catastrophise competitively if need be.  After all, this in the USA in the inter-coup years, and I've watched Homeland, et al.

Mind you, a zygote only a little to the right of Roberts would arguably be to the Democrat's benefit, given the court's track record.  And assuming for these purposes no revolutionary breach of legal continuity for the next half-century or so.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #43 on: February 01, 2022, 11:39:11 AM »
First the minor elephant in the room.  Biden is a racist, so it is not surprising that he believes that it's okay to announce racist criteria for selection of a candidate.  The worst part of the implication is the endorsement of the idea that race really does matter and that only someone with the correct skin color can be trusted to rule fairly for people of the same skin color.  Where does that leave our Asian citizens?  What this says about Biden is that he thinks he can use racism for good (or that by virtue signaling he is "protected" as good from his own racism), and that he believes that only through preference could a black woman become a Supreme Court Justice.  Racism is evil and is not capable of being used as tool for good, the indirect consequences will always outweigh the supposed benefits.  However, we shouldn't let Biden's racism cloud the selection. 

There are far more than enough qualified black women to provide an ample pool for selecting a Supreme Court justice.  We are almost certain to receive a pick that is more than qualified.  It's a poor argument against a candidate that SC Justices have to be the "most" qualified person.  There is no such thing in this context, only a large pool of qualified people with different strengths and weaknesses.  Honest, occasionally there really is a Michael Jordan out there, but in a field like law there is no easy way to identify an MJ versus any other NBA worthy player.  I have every confidence that there are worthy candidates available. 

Now it's a separate question of whether Biden's criteria will cause him to avoid competent liberal (or even progressive) choices in favor of an activist.  I don't credit - at all - that he'll pick a moderate to appease Manchin.  He's going to pick a radical and there will be enough cover for Manchin to back the choice.  Honestly, we still have the same media that claimed Merrick Garland was a moderate choice (Ha!) and that Kavanaugh was a rapist (Shame on them), there's no way they'll allow any information that's negative to get much airtime (even if it's 100% true and relevant) and a 100% chance that they'll attack people that raise reasonable objections as evil racists.

Despite what has been implied above, the court's swing voters are the moderate conservatives.  The left liberal Justices almost never broke ranks, and the progressive justices never break ranks.  Breyer is the last of the left liberal justices, and there's little chance he'll be replaced with a true liberal, so we'll have 3 progressives that vote in lock step on the Court.  The court is at it's best when the Justices are classic liberals and believe in the rule of law and limited government.  Both left progressives and religious conservatives place a strain on fundamental rights.

At the moment, the court is a bit of mess.  Roberts is terrible.  I don't think he has a guiding principal of law, he seems to make decisions based on some kind of meta analysis of how he thinks the decisions will be accepted by society and impact the stature of the court.  It may be the most useless judicial philosophy I've ever seen.  It leads to stupid, inconsistent decisions and horse trading (see the 2 recent opinions on vaccine mandate for an example - overturning 100 employer, upholding for medical facilities receiving medicare benefits) and it backfires constantly because the mushy opinions lead to more legal aggression. 

Gorsuch is an odd mix of extreme conservatism and almost whimsical radical leftism.  I'm left with the impression that he's easily confused by overly fixated on something.  He's generally not a friend to the left, but he wrote the opinion that declared discrimination against trans people to be sex discrimination (and opened the door to the largely unresolvable conflict between born women and trans-women in sports competition).

Thomas is an interesting read.  He often comes across as conservative but his legal conclusions are more strict interpretations than any kind of activism.  I have a harder time figuring Alito out, he seems more conservative, less rule of law, and less notable than Thomas, but often in a similar vein.

That leaves Kavanaugh and Barrett.  It's a bit early to have a strong opinion on Barrett, but so far her questions in oral arguments are few but usually pretty good.  I don't think that's she is the radical conservative the left feared, but time will tell.  Kavanaugh on the other hand, is probably going to be the left's best friend, at least to the extent the left returns to classic liberalism.  A lot his stuff is really well thought out, respects the rule of law but also the rights of the people involved.

The biggest problem distorting opinions about the court is of course abortion rights.  No one is really rational when it comes to the issue, not even the courts.  The literal truth is the court created it's own mess.  They choose to step into politics when they entered the frey, and its clear they'd like to be out of the game but haven't found a way to get out without opening the field to bans on abortions by the states.  It's actually a tough puzzle for a country that purports to be a democracy or a republic, and it's one that has parallels all over the place in modern politics.   For example, you may believe that a ban on abortions is absolutely unconstitutional and can never be allowed, at the same time you believe that a ban on "hate speech" and criminal prosecution of that is acceptable, and never realize the logical and legal inconsistency in holding those positions.

So in summary, Biden is a racist and his announcement demonstrates that, but there is no reason to believe that his racism is going to result in a pick that is any less qualified than a pick would have been without the overtly racist approach.  We are very likely to get a very progressive pick, which automatically means they will be outcome focused with little overall regard to the rule of law or legal consistency.   

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #44 on: February 01, 2022, 12:13:49 PM »
> rightleft22

"Actually the criteria was about representation."

> Seriati

"Where does that leave our Asian citizens?"

---------------------------------------------------

Good point.

If it was about representation then Asian Americans would be getting their first Supreme Court justice ever, and only one on the Supreme Court. Biden is racist against Asian Americans because he won't ever consider any for the position even though they are under-represented, actually have no representation at all.

-----------------------------------------------------

"Roberts is terrible.  I don't think he has a guiding principal of law, he seems to make decisions based on some kind of meta analysis of how he thinks the decisions will be accepted by society and impact the stature of the court.  It may be the most useless judicial philosophy I've ever seen.  It leads to stupid, inconsistent decisions..."

QFT

His Obamacare decision fit this mold precisely.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #45 on: February 01, 2022, 12:35:49 PM »
 
Quote
Biden is racist against Asian Americans because he won't ever consider any for the position even though they are under-represented, actually have no representation at all.

We could test this.  Thomas could resign and we could see who Biden nominates then.


TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #46 on: February 01, 2022, 12:44:24 PM »
Quote
Biden pick Pan confirmed as first Asian American woman on D.C. federal court

Just the sort of thing you'd expect a racist to do, make a groundbreaking nomination.

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #47 on: February 01, 2022, 12:48:34 PM »
Asian Americans make up ~ 4% of the population.

African Americans make up 14%.

Currently 12.7% of Federal judges are African American and only 2.7 Asian American.

It certainly looks like we need to look at adding Asian American Federal judges and eventually add representative members to the Supreme Court. 

Selecting qualified individuals who represent various ethnicities and schools of thought is critical for interpreting the law.  Nine members is probably too small to be truly representative.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #48 on: February 01, 2022, 01:28:41 PM »
I came across a few articles that talk about lack of Asian-American representation in judge, DA, and private sector partner roles. Some interesting background, but I didn't expect anyone was interested in going too deep. For judge roles, it isn't just federal. There is also underrepresentation in state supreme courts, etc.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's choice for the SC
« Reply #49 on: February 01, 2022, 03:26:41 PM »
Quote
Biden pick Pan confirmed as first Asian American woman on D.C. federal court

Just the sort of thing you'd expect a racist to do, make a groundbreaking nomination.

Actually its exactly what I expect a woke racist to do.  There are tons of them in my community and they are all fans of giant virtue signaling gestures and standing up for minority rights, while referring to their lawn people by racial terms in private, setting "neutral" town policies to exclude people of color from nearby communities and flipping out when their kids come out.  Virtue signaling is the safe way to "prove" you're not a racist without actually walking the walk.

If Biden picked a nominee because of their skin color he's a racist.

Asian Americans make up ~ 4% of the population.

African Americans make up 14%.

Currently 12.7% of Federal judges are African American and only 2.7 Asian American.

Per the ABA, in 2020 5% of all lawyers are African American and 2% Asian.  When you consider that the number of lawyers of color has generally been on a sharp incline for a while, it means that lawyers of color are generally under-represented, even against those low percentages, in the population of older lawyers, which is the population from which most judges are selected.   https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/news/2020/07/potlp2020.pdf

Quote
It certainly looks like we need to look at adding Asian American Federal judges and eventually add representative members to the Supreme Court. 

Selecting qualified individuals who represent various ethnicities and schools of thought is critical for interpreting the law.  Nine members is probably too small to be truly representative.

The point of having 9 members is not to have token representatives from all races, it's to have 9 members who are capable of applying the law without regard to race and ethnicity.  Skin color is  not critical for interpreting the law, to imply that it is, is also racist thinking.  I agree that having people of different backgrounds is something that is useful, but skin color is only a poor (and offensive) proxy for the actual relevant characteristics.

Statistically, it is interesting that Biden promised to appoint a black woman.  The court's current make up, is 1 of 9 members are black (or about 11% versus 14% of the population, but only 5% of the nation's attorneys).  The court currently has 3 women out of 9 (or about 33% versus about 51% of the population, but only 37% of nation's attorneys).  Having two black members "over represents" the population percentage and is more than 4 times the percentage versus the actual practicing attorneys.  But again, other than Biden's racist thinking, there's no reason we shouldn't have 2, 3, 4 or 9 black or female justices, or Asian justices, for that matter.