4 ms·

Majority of Americans want Biden to consider all possible Supreme Court nominees

11 points by steelstraw 5y ago

grappler 5y ago
The thing that's hilarious to me about this debate is the unstated assumption that, but for this promise to appoint a black woman in this nomination cycle, the overall process of nominations and confirmations would select -- and for prior appointments has selected -- the most brilliant, most impartial legal minds available.
josephcsible 5y ago
Imagine what would have happened if Trump had said he'd refuse to consider anyone except white men as Supreme Court nominees. What Biden is doing is exactly as racist and sexist as that would have been.
- bediger4000 5y ago
  https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/360598-meet-the-powerful-group-behind-trumps-judicial-nominations https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/360598-meet-the...
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    I assume you're trying to say "he did do that", but that's clearly false, since Amy Coney Barrett is not a white man.
    - bediger4000 5y ago
      Yes, "Trump did do that", but not exactly the same. I see nuance is getting lost on Hacker News, too. Trump said outright that he'd nominate federal judges off a list, not that he would "consider all judges". The media regularly hold Democrats to a far tighter standard than they hold Republicans in general, and infinitely tighter standard than they held Trump. This whole thing is merely another example.
      - josephcsible 5y ago
        > Trump said outright that he'd nominate federal judges off a list, not that he would "consider all judges". It's perfectly okay to only nominate off a list, as long as protected classes like race or sex aren't criteria to get on said list.
        bediger4000 5y ago
        That's not what the article was all about. "Majority of Americans want Biden to consider all possible Supreme Court Nominees". Trump did it off a very limited, very ideological list, we didn't hear cries of dismay from the media about that. Trump got special treatment from the media, Biden catches hell.
        bediger4000 5y ago
        https://www.thedailybeast.com/georgetown-law-puts-ilya-shapiro-on-leave-after-appalling-scotus-tweets?via=carrierpigeon&source=limbaugh https://www.thedailybeast.com/georgetown-law-puts-ilya-shapi...
hotpotamus 5y ago
This has got me thinking - why don't we just stack rank all federal judges and pick the top 9 to be on the Supreme Court? I mean obviously it's a silly question but interesting to think about the KPIs for judges. But I believe really the answer is that today when law is effectively written by the courts, the main consideration is how they will vote. And given that the court is currently stacked to vote only for elite conservative priorities, it hardly matters who Biden picks anyway.
- salawat 5y ago
  Holy jumping Jesuits. No. Just... No. This has never worked well on any private org, and it will definitely not work in the Judiciary, especially since to establish that vaunted KPI you'd need to measure against something objective, and so much of the legal system would be undone since the subjective weighs very heavily into it. Otherwise you wouldn't have things like the Ninth Circuit (which I think would be an improvement), yet I'm reluctant to say that throwing that subjectivity out isn't in some way part of a long term check or balance...
  - hotpotamus 5y ago
    Indeed, it would seem that meritocracy is something of a myth? Or perhaps a half-truth? How can one work hard to achieve a subjective indicator? This subject just made me think about it a bit. There are probably thousands (10's of thousands?) of judges fit to sit on the Supreme Court who have all the merit, and yet statistically speaking basically none of them ever will which makes any selection unfair, no? This might actually be one reason to enlarge the court, but of course you'll still have many more qualified candidates than slots.
bediger4000 5y ago
Did anybody poll Americans on Trump's promise to only nominate federal and SCOTUS judges from the Federalist Society's list? No? Why not?
- tharne 5y ago
  Where were you the several years? There was quite a bit of outcry over Trump's supreme court picks.
  - bediger4000 5y ago
    Sure, individual picks, but the article we're discussing is that Americans want Biden to choose from all possible picks. Trump stated (and followed through) with nominees from the Federalist Society's list, a list limited to those holding a specific ideology. Biden's got a different list, but gets a ton of flack. Trump sails on the list pledge. Let's stick to the topic.
    - ashwagary 5y ago
      It seems Biden owes something to the black community for getting him elected since he failed at voting rights, police/criminal-justice reform, and reparations. Either pick a Supreme Court justice that represents the black community or lose the Senate and 2024 election. "Vote blue no matter who" is going out the window, the black community wants tangibles after decades of neglect by the Democrat party.
throwawaysleep 5y ago
People always dismissed people complaining that a minority got picked over them to look good in the company photo. Well, here is that process in plain sight.
mrlonglong 5y ago
Why can't they just nominate non-political lawyers? Allegiance to any political parties should automatically make them ineligible to serve on the supreme court.

11 points by steelstraw 5y ago

The thing that's hilarious to me about this debate is the unstated assumption that, but for this promise to appoint a black woman in this nomination cycle, the overall process of nominations and confirmations would select -- and for prior appointments has selected -- the most brilliant, most impartial legal minds available.

josephcsible 5y ago

Imagine what would have happened if Trump had said he'd refuse to consider anyone except white men as Supreme Court nominees. What Biden is doing is exactly as racist and sexist as that would have been.

bediger4000 5y ago
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/360598-meet-the-powerful-group-behind-trumps-judicial-nominations https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/360598-meet-the...
- josephcsible 5y ago
  I assume you're trying to say "he did do that", but that's clearly false, since Amy Coney Barrett is not a white man.
  - bediger4000 5y ago
    Yes, "Trump did do that", but not exactly the same. I see nuance is getting lost on Hacker News, too. Trump said outright that he'd nominate federal judges off a list, not that he would "consider all judges". The media regularly hold Democrats to a far tighter standard than they hold Republicans in general, and infinitely tighter standard than they held Trump. This whole thing is merely another example.
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      > Trump said outright that he'd nominate federal judges off a list, not that he would "consider all judges". It's perfectly okay to only nominate off a list, as long as protected classes like race or sex aren't criteria to get on said list.
      - bediger4000 5y ago
        That's not what the article was all about. "Majority of Americans want Biden to consider all possible Supreme Court Nominees". Trump did it off a very limited, very ideological list, we didn't hear cries of dismay from the media about that. Trump got special treatment from the media, Biden catches hell.
      - bediger4000 5y ago
        https://www.thedailybeast.com/georgetown-law-puts-ilya-shapiro-on-leave-after-appalling-scotus-tweets?via=carrierpigeon&source=limbaugh https://www.thedailybeast.com/georgetown-law-puts-ilya-shapi...

hotpotamus 5y ago

This has got me thinking - why don't we just stack rank all federal judges and pick the top 9 to be on the Supreme Court? I mean obviously it's a silly question but interesting to think about the KPIs for judges. But I believe really the answer is that today when law is effectively written by the courts, the main consideration is how they will vote. And given that the court is currently stacked to vote only for elite conservative priorities, it hardly matters who Biden picks anyway.

salawat 5y ago
Holy jumping Jesuits. No. Just... No. This has never worked well on any private org, and it will definitely not work in the Judiciary, especially since to establish that vaunted KPI you'd need to measure against something objective, and so much of the legal system would be undone since the subjective weighs very heavily into it. Otherwise you wouldn't have things like the Ninth Circuit (which I think would be an improvement), yet I'm reluctant to say that throwing that subjectivity out isn't in some way part of a long term check or balance...
- hotpotamus 5y ago
  Indeed, it would seem that meritocracy is something of a myth? Or perhaps a half-truth? How can one work hard to achieve a subjective indicator? This subject just made me think about it a bit. There are probably thousands (10's of thousands?) of judges fit to sit on the Supreme Court who have all the merit, and yet statistically speaking basically none of them ever will which makes any selection unfair, no? This might actually be one reason to enlarge the court, but of course you'll still have many more qualified candidates than slots.

bediger4000 5y ago

Did anybody poll Americans on Trump's promise to only nominate federal and SCOTUS judges from the Federalist Society's list? No? Why not?

tharne 5y ago
Where were you the several years? There was quite a bit of outcry over Trump's supreme court picks.
- bediger4000 5y ago
  Sure, individual picks, but the article we're discussing is that Americans want Biden to choose from all possible picks. Trump stated (and followed through) with nominees from the Federalist Society's list, a list limited to those holding a specific ideology. Biden's got a different list, but gets a ton of flack. Trump sails on the list pledge. Let's stick to the topic.
  - ashwagary 5y ago
    It seems Biden owes something to the black community for getting him elected since he failed at voting rights, police/criminal-justice reform, and reparations. Either pick a Supreme Court justice that represents the black community or lose the Senate and 2024 election. "Vote blue no matter who" is going out the window, the black community wants tangibles after decades of neglect by the Democrat party.

throwawaysleep 5y ago

People always dismissed people complaining that a minority got picked over them to look good in the company photo. Well, here is that process in plain sight.

mrlonglong 5y ago

Why can't they just nominate non-political lawyers? Allegiance to any political parties should automatically make them ineligible to serve on the supreme court.