SCOTUS 15: Help Us, Ruth Bader Ginsburg! You're Our Only Hope!

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

It would be really nice to see SCOTUS justices with expertise in:

• Criminal Defense
• Employment and Labor Law
• Environmental Law
• Immigration Law
• Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Really need environmental law. They will gut all regulations as soon as they gut women and gay rights

 

[dxmnkd316]

Yeah, and to be perfectly frank, without changes to ensure we protect the environment, it doesn't matter if we achieve perfect equality for anyone.

Every month that goes on, the more militant I become about climate change. It's got to be the #1 issue today before we don't have a tomorrow.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Yeah, and to be perfectly frank, without changes to ensure we protect the environment, it doesn't matter if we achieve perfect equality for anyone.

Every month that goes on, the more militant I become about climate change. It's got to be the #1 issue today before we don't have a tomorrow.

I’m the same way.

just finished reading Ministry for the Future. Science fiction for sure but probably the most accurate I’ve read for how this will all unfold. Terrifying and avoidable

 

[burd]

His acts and omissions re: Covid cost tens of thousands of lives, and touting the Big Lie seriously undermines our bedrock democratic process, but his full-on support for the fossil fuel industry and his abandonment of global an national regulation will likely be seen as Dump’s most harmful failure

 

[Kepler]

I don't disagree. But it would be very well possible to achieve this without the statement that was given.

But why does it bother you? That's what I don't get -- I can't understand why this gets under people's skin.

Diversity of life experience is a key trait of all successful organizations. Groupthink is lethal. The more ways in which we can diversify our decision-makers the better, particularly with SCOTUS which is quite literally the last court of appeal.

This isn't just about democratization and inclusion, as laudable as those are. This is pragmatic -- building resiliency into our institutions so they don't shatter from one well-placed blow. This is forging in that quality of metals where the crystals don't all run in the same direction, which makes the alloy stronger (I forget the word).

 

[Slap Shot]

But why does it bother you? That's what I don't get -- I can't understand why this gets under people's skin.

Diversity of life experience is a key trait of all successful organizations. Groupthink is lethal. The more ways in which we can diversify our decision-makers the better, particularly with SCOTUS which is quite literally the last court of appeal.

This isn't just about democratization and inclusion, as laudable as those are. This is pragmatic -- building resiliency into our institutions so they don't shatter from one well-placed blow. This is forging in that quality of metals where the crystals don't all run in the same direction, which makes the alloy stronger (I forget the word).

I already explained why it's bothersome - it becomes an unnecessary talking point instead of just focusing on naming the nominee and going through the process. The rest of your post has what to do with me? I have nothing against nominating a black woman for the position and imho it's past due.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

St. Reagan proclaimed he was going to nominate a woman. I have no issue with them picking people based on minority status. No problem at all.

 

[Kepler]

I already explained why it's bothersome - it becomes an unnecessary talking point instead of just focusing on naming the nominee and going through the process. The rest of your post has what to do with me? I have nothing against nominating a black woman for the position and imho it's past due.

Not everything's about you, Slap Shot. ;-)

It's not a bothersome and unnecessary talking point, it's a healthy and necessary one. We should actively work into the conversation that demographically-blind selection for representative bodies is wrong-headed at best and suspect as worst. We should trumpet that we are doing this on purpose, because it's both the morally right and the pragmatically smart thing to do.

We should not soft-pedal it, we should smash it out of the park.

 

[LynahFan]

Not everything's about you, Slap Shot. ;-)

It's not a bothersome and unnecessary talking point, it's a healthy and necessary one. We should actively work into the conversation that demographically-blind selection for representative bodies is wrong-headed at best and suspect as worst. We should trumpet that we are going this on purpose, because it's both the morally right and the pragmatically smart thing to do.

We should not soft-pedal it, we should smash it out of the park.

Exactly - if only to highlight the fact that, despite all the progress of the last 50 to 500 years, there are still people who fear a black woman’s having a seat at the table. I’m not talking about Slap Shot’s trepidation around the politics of the announcement - I’m talking about those who genuinely don’t want a black woman on the court. The ones who would have been just as dismayed by the pick after the fact even if there had not been a pre-announcement. Taking them head on by throwing it in their faces forces them out of the shadows and forces them to admit that they are who we know they are. No more cheap shots in the corners. The gloves are off at center ice. Game on, muthafuckas.

 

[Kepler]

Exactly - if only to highlight the fact that, despite all the progress of the last 50 to 500 years, there are still people who fear a black woman’s having a seat at the table. I’m not talking about Slap Shot’s trepidation around the politics of the announcement - I’m talking about those who genuinely don’t want a black woman on the court. The ones who would have been just as dismayed by the pick after the fact even if there had not been a pre-announcement. Taking them head on by throwing it in their faces forces them out of the shadows and forces them to admit that they are who we know they are. No more cheap shots in the corners. The gloves are off at center ice. Game on, muthafuckas.

The reason I take such strong exception to Slap Shot's take is I used to share it during my libertarian youth. I really did not see how neutrality and blindness in a world which has been set in a discriminatory motion is merely going along with that motion. It *feels* morally clean, as if your hands aren't dirty, but it isn't.

America is a car that was driven into a racist and misogynist rut. It's not enough to no longer be on the gas pedal. You aren't doing anything if you remain passive. You have to get out and lift the godd-mn car out of the rut. Otherwise it just stays there forever.

 

[Swansong]

I've come around a long way on this. It used to bug me - that perhaps "I will choose a <demographic item here>" would be cutting off the most qualified candidate. But after reading a good deal of material I've come to the idea that there are probably hundreds, if not more, people that could do this SCOTUS job and do it well.

So if, for the sake of diversity, we want to limit the choice for a given vacancy to black women. Or hispanic trans men. Or literally any intersection. I'm pretty confident that we'd find someone qualified and capable. And that's great.

My only complaint is that I feel like we have sufficient representation of Harvard/Yale Law grads, and perhaps we could look beyond that as well.

 

[Kepler]

My only complaint is that I feel like we have sufficient representation of Harvard/Yale Law grads, and perhaps we could look beyond that as well.

I am all for opening it up to Cornell and Columbia grads.

 

[mookie1995]

I am all for opening it up to Cornell and Columbia grads.

Justice Robert Kraft :.) ….

 

[burd]

I've come around a long way on this. It used to bug me - that perhaps "I will choose a <demographic item here>" would be cutting off the most qualified candidate. But after reading a good deal of material I've come to the idea that there are probably hundreds, if not more, people that could do this SCOTUS job and do it well.

im not talking at you, Swan, but most voters have little idea what it takes to be a strong justice or what the justices are doing on a day-by day basis. Same goes for elected trial judges at all levels, probably more so.

But a truly brilliant justice makes a difference. If you find the time, read an editorial Ruth Bader wrote for her 8th grade school newspaper, The Highway Herald. She had it early. Possibly the last truly brilliant person to attend Cornell for undergraduate study

the justices tend to have Yale and Harvard law in their bloodstream, but that’s the pool most of the clerks come from, and clerking for the Supremes is a ticket to the federal bench. Things may be changing—uno would have an idea about that.

 

[Kepler]

Possibly the last truly brilliant person to attend Cornell for undergraduate study

Surely not.

 

[Swansong]

im not talking at you, Swan, but most voters have little idea what it takes to be a strong justice or what the justices are doing on a day-by day basis. Same goes for elected trial judges at all levels, probably more so.

But a truly brilliant justice makes a difference. If you find the time, read an editorial Ruth Bader wrote for her 8th grade school newspaper, The Highway Herald. She had it early. Possibly the last truly brilliant person to attend Cornell for undergraduate study

the justices tend to have Yale and Harvard law in their bloodstream, but that’s the pool most of the clerks come from, and clerking for the Supremes is a ticket to the federal bench. Things may be changing—uno would have an idea about that.

Oh I definitely understand and don't disagree. I just think that in a country of 330-350 million people, there are hundreds of people that can be excellent Supreme Court Justices, if not more.


No disrespect to the Ivy's, I just think diversity of experience is also very important. Having pretty much everyone involved come from one of two virtually identical education tracks ... is not really diverse.

 

[burd]

Oh I definitely understand and don't disagree. I just think that in a country of 330-350 million people, there are hundreds of people that can be excellent Supreme Court Justices, if not more.


No disrespect to the Ivy's, I just think diversity of experience is also very important. Having pretty much everyone involved come from one of two virtually identical education tracks ... is not really diverse.

And I agree with all that as, I’m sure, do most.

 

[Kepler]

No disrespect to the Ivy's, I just think diversity of experience is also very important. Having pretty much everyone involved come from one of two virtually identical education tracks ... is not really diverse.

As the Resident Andy Bernard, I believe there is entirely too much Ivy undergrad dominance. While I loved my school and my classmates, there are at least a hundred other universities where I could have gotten just as good an education and met just as interesting and talented classmates. The median changes but that doesn't matter since people self-select their friends.

However. For law school, and far more especially med school, give me the best of the people there are, and those people are drawn for a variety of reasons, some good, many bad, to the top tier. By no means just the Ivies -- but probably not past the the top 25. I want that guy operating on me.

The #1 kid at 250 different undergrad colleges is interchangeable. The fact that she wound up at Ivy College or Enormous Flyover Jock Factory University or even Batsh-t Fuckwit Religious School was an accident of the birth lottery. But grad school and professional school is different. There, the filters aren't money, they are ability. Plenty of demographic diversity among their grads.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

As the Resident Andy Bernard, I believe there is entirely too much Ivy undergrad dominance. While I loved my school and my classmates, there are at least a hundred other universities where I could have gotten just as good an education and met just as interesting and talented classmates. The median changes but that doesn't matter since people self-select their friends.

However. For law school, and far more especially med school, give me the best of the people there are, and those people are drawn for a variety of reasons, some good, many bad, to the top tier. By no means just the Ivies -- but probably not past the the top 25. I want that guy operating on me.

The #1 kid at 250 different undergrad colleges is interchangeable. The fact that she wound up at Ivy College or Enormous Flyover Jock Factory University or even Batsh-t Fuckwit Religious School was an accident of the birth lottery. But grad school and professional school is different. There, the filters aren't money, they are ability. Plenty of demographic diversity among their grads.

Sadly it’s the top 15 mba programs running too much of this country.

 

[Kepler]

Sadly it’s the top 15 mba programs running too much of this country.

Sadly, there are MBA programs.