Daily Page | Zebrality | NCAA Pool | General Chat | Latest Comments

You are on an individual archive page

Click here to return to the main page


Wikipedia does good things. Reward them.

The Daily Links Page
Got a link to submit?
  • Harry Reid: Dubya is 'worst president' for trying to save us from fiscal oblivion
  • Team Obama: Richardson misled us
  • Minnesota canvassing board expected to say that Democrat Al Franken is winner in Senate race
  • Obama Wants 600,000 More Bureaucrats
  • Senora Kennedy Is Make Very Good Senator
  • Holiday Sales Drop to Force Bankruptcies, Closings
  • Humorous Reminders of Common Writing Mistakes
  • Yellowstone Gets very Quakey
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Your 2009 Horoscope
  • Bush Sr. wants Jeb as president
  • Huffington Poster Rips Gore, Global Warming
  • Is living in a city bad for your brain?
  • Report: Patriots will use franchise tag on Matt Cassel
  • Thousands of shoes tie up Miami freeway traffic
  • Jones: Favre's play warranted benching
  • A Russian's take on how the US will split up by 2010
  • Group Wants 50% Hike in Gas Taxes
  • 6 reasons why no one is making catty comments about Caroline Kennedy's looks
  • Senate Dems May Physically Bar Burris From Entering Senate
  • EXCLUSIVE: RNC draft rips Bush's bailouts
  • Capitol offense: Building's in Madison, but skyline's in Minneapolis
  • Isn't 'Happy Holidays' a form of suicide bombing, too?
  • Dictator Stalin voted third-greatest Russian
  • Compilation of 2008's Top Movies Lists
  • The Seven Best Capers of 2008
  • Sheepshead
       [ 1 comment ]
  • 2008 Was the Beginning of the End for the Global Warming Hoax
  • Liberals start to feel the pain of liberalism
  • Man allegedly hides in bathroom, robs restaurant, spends loot at strip club
  • Bielema is in over his head and dragging the UW program into the ground.
  • Stray cat colony takes care of homeless baby
  • The Good News about the Bailouts
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Snowzilla Returns!
  • What If New York Goes Bust?
  • Great Moments in Local Government
  • Obama 'repressing inner geek'
  • Is Tammy Baldwin selling out the gay community?
  • Christmas Is Now An Official Holiday In...Iraq
  • Seattle refuses to use salt, resulting in 1800 miles of skating rink
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Why Obama Really Might Decriminalize Marijuana
  • Fourth Amendment Rights in Numbers Dialed Stored Inside a Cell Phone
  • Festivus for the rest of us
  • Companies That Won't Make It Through 2009
  • Franken Up By 48 Ballots With Most Counted
  • Good Argument for Tax Havens
  • CBS Seems To Think That Jamarcus Russell Is A Bald, White Kicker
  • Judge backs secrecy on Zimmermann 911 call
  • Beer goggles last longer for women
  • Congress Gives Itself a Raise In Midst of a Recession
  • Looks first, knowledge later

     

  • Supreme Court Diversity (again)

       October 02, 2005

    I was thinking about John Roberts and diversity on the Supreme Court today. I've written about this before and I really don't want to rehash it. But, as the White House prepares to nominate someone else to the Supreme Court I can't help but think it's a shame that how someone looks is the only diversity that seems to matter. Even someone like Alex Kozinski would be branded as "just" another white male. No notice would be taken to the fact that he grew up as the son of Holocaust survivors behind the Iron Curtain in Romania. And that's not just a superficial difference either. It's easy to see how Kozinski's experiences as a child helped to shape his libertarian view of the law.

    But back to Roberts. On the surface he really does have a similar background to the rest of the Court: boarding school, Ivy League undergrad, Harvard Law, law clerking, appellate court appointment. But dig a little deeper and think about some of the cases the Court may be asked to hear during Roberts' tenure. Roberts and his wife couldn't conceive a child. They adopted two children (one who famously couldn't stand still during his introduction). As reproductive science and ethics collide, isn't it important to have someone on the Court who has felt the pain of infertility?

    That's really only a little tongue in cheek. What I think the President should do is approach this the way you'd fill any job. You'd find the best candidates and then interview them to determine who's the most passionate about the job, who will add the most to the rest of the team and who is the most interesting person. It seems pretty simple to me.


    Posted by kris at October 2, 2005 10:03 PM

        The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1110

     

    Trackback Entries

     


    Comments

    #  October 9th, 2005 3:26 AM      mbrlr
    The Supreme Court isn't just any job. There are traditionally some limitations on, if not what the President asks, what the potential nominee may offer in response to any questions about how he or she would rule on specific issues. Of course, if one believes our Supreme Court not to be a common law court and thus limited to a very narrow role in the Constitutional process, I suppose none of that matters. Let's just have all US lawyers submit resumes...  
     

     

     


    To leave a comment you must be logged in.
    Log in here
    or Get an Account here.