Couchpotato
Platinum Member
- Mar 2, 2021
- 11,682
- 5,598
- 938
Like I said before, the administration has fucked this up by announcing before hand that the nomination will be a black woman. Sometimes showing people how the sausage is made is ok, sometimes as in this case it's a huge mistake.But it is what is happening in a sense. There are at least 50 people that are all equally qualified to be a SC Justice. All of them are the "best candidate for the job". So they took that list and narrowed it down to add some diversity to the court.
But to your point that you are still limiting the field and excluding literally 94% of the population before you even start looking at qualifications. If you don't see how that's a problem, then I don't know that I can help you. Im sure the person that the admin puts forth will be a "qualified candidate" (in quotes because it's subjective what that means) but there's now way around the fact that the way they came to decide on that qualified candidate was discriminatory.
Let me pose it this way. The supreme court was established in 1789 by the Judiciary act and signed into law by George Washington. The court was comprised entirely of white men until the late 60's. 115 justices have been selected of those 108 have been white men. I would argue that likely all the white men that sat on the court were "qualified" to do so, but the selection process was certainly discriminatory for the vast majority of them was it not? In my opinion the way to fix that is not to repeat that mistake in the opposite direction.
Last edited: