Author Topic: SCOTUS And Affirmative Action  (Read 122 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,122
SCOTUS And Affirmative Action
« on: March 21, 2022, 03:24:08 pm »
SCOTUS And Affirmative Action

Biden made it U.S. policy to select jurists for its highest court on the basis of race.

By Peter Van Buren
March 21, 2022

Setting Ukraine aside for a moment: Joe Biden has abandoned the pursuit of a race-neutral society.

In choosing Ketanji Brown Jackson, whose confirmation hearings begin today, as his Supreme Court pick, Biden made it the policy of the United States to select jurists for its highest court on the basis of race. He stated that most clearly in his announcement that it was not character or skill, but race and gender that would be his starting points as he chose a replacement for Justice Stephen Breyer. It was a stunning denunciation of ideals Americans have been told to strive for since the Civil War.

There are plenty of people alive today who remember placards noting segregated toilets and white-only waiting rooms. Imagine those people realizing the signs are back, albeit turned on their heads: In 2022, white jurists, to say nothing of Chinese American or Hispanic jurists, must atone for the sin of slavery. To insist this Supreme Court nominee be of a certain race is to admit we are not all created equal, once and forever.

Here’s why discrimination disserves the United States. Of the 1,395 sitting federal judges, just 56 are black women. Only 13 have served at the appellate-court level, one step below the Supreme Court. Assume some of those women are too moderate for Biden, and you are left with a tiny handful of people who even meet Joe’s minimum qualifications. Why would anyone want to so dramatically limit the pool of candidates for such an important job? Is diversity really more important than finding the best jurist to decide critical questions for all Americans? Aren’t we trying to get past the point where a person’s having a certain skin color was the metric of their success?

One judge who reportedly counted among Biden’s top three candidates was Leondra Kruger, who would have been the first person in more than 40 years to move from a state-level court to the Supreme Court. The question of whether someone with her credentials would have even reached the final stages were she not a black woman has an obvious answer.

The thing is, Joe Biden is no crusader. He is a pandering politician. It was exactly two years to the day before he announced Ketanji Brown Jackson as his Supreme Court pick that Biden, on the debate stage in South Carolina days before a primary he could not afford to lose, first made his pledge to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court. Biden cynically announced his pick in the midst of the Ukrainian invasion to fit it into the final hours of Black History Month.

As a panderer, the 2022-version of Joe Biden lies about being arrested during the civil-rights movement, while the 1960s-version would not have been caught within miles of a demonstration. Biden of course follows others down this cynical path, like Hillary Clinton, who helped pass a crime bill that led to the incarceration of scores of black youths and turned around to do an Amos ‘n Andy accent in Selma as she sought the black vote.

*  *  *

Source:  https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/scotus-and-affirmative-action/

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,122
Re: SCOTUS And Affirmative Action
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2022, 03:25:04 pm »
So, in the interests of judicial ethics, we can all rest assured that, if confirmed, and if seated, Ms. Jackson will recuse herself from every case involving affirmative action, as well as racial and sexual discrimination?

Online Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,800
  • Gender: Male
  • Dumbest member of the forum
Re: SCOTUS And Affirmative Action
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2022, 11:38:11 pm »
Why are the Republicans conceding to "confirmation hearings", when -- as yet -- THERE IS NO VACANCY on the Supreme Court...?

There are currently NINE justices "sitting" on the active Court and deciding cases.
There is NO VACANCY -- not yet.

For the Pubbies to agree to "confirmation" hearings (again, when there is NO VACANCY on The Court), and then perhaps even a confirmation VOTE, what they really will be doing is agreeing to appoint A TENTH JUSTICE to The Supreme Court.

There will not BE "a vacancy" until Breyer steps down (from his position as an active Justice) and his [former] seat BECOMES "vacant".

THEN -- and ONLY THEN -- should there be confirmation hearings and a vote on a replacement nominee.

Why are the Republicans going along with this...?

(have I made myself clear ??)

Offline libertybele

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,059
  • Gender: Female
Re: SCOTUS And Affirmative Action
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2022, 11:48:50 pm »
Why are the Republicans conceding to "confirmation hearings", when -- as yet -- THERE IS NO VACANCY on the Supreme Court...?

There are currently NINE justices "sitting" on the active Court and deciding cases.
There is NO VACANCY -- not yet.

For the Pubbies to agree to "confirmation" hearings (again, when there is NO VACANCY on The Court), and then perhaps even a confirmation VOTE, what they really will be doing is agreeing to appoint A TENTH JUSTICE to The Supreme Court.

There will not BE "a vacancy" until Breyer steps down (from his position as an active Justice) and his [former] seat BECOMES "vacant".

THEN -- and ONLY THEN -- should there be confirmation hearings and a vote on a replacement nominee.

Why are the Republicans going along with this...?

(have I made myself clear ??)

You make a very valid point, although Breyer announced his retirement in January and said that he will retire at the end of his term (I haven't been able to find the exact date - June or July of this year). In the statement announcing his retirement he said that he would step down provided that his successor has been appointed and confirmed. 

You are correct; they would essentially put 10 justices on the bench.  What happens if he decides not to retire after all?  Then they in essence will have seated 10 justices, with the help of the GOP.

Also consider, that Thomas has an infection and is in the hospital and he has served for 30 years; he is almost 74. He's no spring chicken. So, if he decides to step down, Joe would get to appoint another justice tilting the courts liberal once again.

https://www.thegreenpapers.com/Hx/SupremeCourt.html
« Last Edit: March 21, 2022, 11:54:30 pm by libertybele »
Romans 12:16-21

Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly, do not claim to be wiser than you are.  Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all.  If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all…do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,122
Re: SCOTUS And Affirmative Action
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2022, 11:54:44 pm »
You make a very valid point, although he announced his retirement in January and said that he will retire at the end of his term (I haven't been able to find the exactly date - June or July of this year).

You are correct; they would essentially put 10 justices on the bench and how if he decides not to retire after all?  Then they in essence will have seated 10 justices, with the help of the GOP.

Also consider, that Thomas has an infection.  He's no spring chicken. So, if he decides to step down, Joe would get to appoint another justice tilting the courts liberal once again.

Breyer was confirmed on July 29, 1994, before the justice he replaced - Blackmun - retired.  Blackmun didn't retire until August 3, 1994.

So, no new "unconstitutional" ground is being broken here.