Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Supreme Reaction
I just got done listening to the President announce his nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, and an hour's worth of punditry about it thereafter.
I don't know much about Judge Roberts (I've never had dinner with him), so I, like most people, look forward to learning about him.
But the thing that surprised and pleased me the most about all the TV commentary I saw immediately following the announcement was that the gender issue never came up. It seemed in the most recent articles I was reading that it was almost a foregone conclusion that the pick would be a woman, largely because the nominee would be replacing a woman. As an opponent of affirmative action, I'm pleased that President Bush chose the candidate he thought was best for the job, rather than the candidate who fit a particular demographic group. (Although, as I stated in my last post, the best candidate for the job very well could have been a woman!) Now, when Justices Rehnquist and/or Stevens retire, President Bush could certainly nominate a woman. In that case, she won't be stigmatized as having possibly been chosen not because of her gender, but because of her qualifications (as Clarence Thomas has intimated he sometimes feels with regard to his race).
I don't know much about Judge Roberts (I've never had dinner with him), so I, like most people, look forward to learning about him.
But the thing that surprised and pleased me the most about all the TV commentary I saw immediately following the announcement was that the gender issue never came up. It seemed in the most recent articles I was reading that it was almost a foregone conclusion that the pick would be a woman, largely because the nominee would be replacing a woman. As an opponent of affirmative action, I'm pleased that President Bush chose the candidate he thought was best for the job, rather than the candidate who fit a particular demographic group. (Although, as I stated in my last post, the best candidate for the job very well could have been a woman!) Now, when Justices Rehnquist and/or Stevens retire, President Bush could certainly nominate a woman. In that case, she won't be stigmatized as having possibly been chosen not because of her gender, but because of her qualifications (as Clarence Thomas has intimated he sometimes feels with regard to his race).
Comments:
My view of the nomination process has been perhaps hopelessly affected by a few seasons of the "West Wing." Enough that I'd be willing to bet President Bush didn't choose the best person for the job, but the best person for the job that can get through a confirmation.
Anyway, it's nice to see that you have time to post with the bar less than a week away.
I just wish I didn't feel guilt for every waking moment that I'm not studying.
Post a Comment
Anyway, it's nice to see that you have time to post with the bar less than a week away.
I just wish I didn't feel guilt for every waking moment that I'm not studying.
