Author Topic: Did Biden realize his discriminatory pledge for his Supreme Court pick? By Jonathan Turley  (Read 188 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 385,464
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Did Biden realize his discriminatory pledge for his Supreme Court pick?
By Jonathan Turley, opinion contributor — 03/17/20 11:00 AM EDT

In his debate with Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden made two pledges to voters and asked his opponent to do the same to nominate only a black woman for the next open Supreme Court seat and to choose a woman as his vice president. Even with identity politics, the pledge to impose a gender and race requirement for the next Supreme Court nominee is as ironic as it is troubling. What Biden was declaring, and what Sanders wisely avoided, would effectively constitute discrimination in admission to the Supreme Court. Indeed, the Supreme Court has declared that such race or gender conditions are strictly unconstitutional for admission to public colleges.

The pledges that Biden has made amount to this. No matter how qualified men or, in the case of the Supreme Court, women who are not black may be, he will not consider them as candidates. In the case of vice president, such gender discrimination would be allowed, as presidential candidates can select a running mate on any grounds and voters can decide if they approve. Justices, however, are lifetime appointees, and presidents have always been careful to state that, while they seek diversity among their nominees, they would appoint the most qualified person regardless of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. But in a single declaration, Biden quickly dispensed with even the pretense of equal consideration.

Imposing an absolute requirement that a nominee be a particular gender and race is effectively an affirmative action pledge. It is precisely what the Supreme Court already declared to be unconstitutional discrimination. In the 1977 case of Regents of the University of California versus Allan Bakke, the Supreme Court found quota and affirmative action admissions policies based on race to be unconstitutional. While the justices were fractured on the logic, a clear plurality on the bench supported the view that preferring “members of any one group for no reason other than race or ethnic origin is discrimination for its own sake,” adding “this the Constitution forbids.”

more
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/487961-did-biden-realize-his-discriminatory-pledge-for-his-supreme-court-pick
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,862
  • Gender: Male
  • Dumbest member of the forum
Interesting, the source of this article...