Here's my take at this point.
I'm a big fan of 'personal attributes shouldn't matter'. Why shouldn't a white person be a champion of black rights, a black man of women's rights, a straight man of gay equal rights? Clarence Thomas does not represent black people's interests because of his own race. But, I quickly recognize how flawed that idea is, how reality doesn't match the idea.
And then, there's the simple issue of 'equity' - if there's a court of all white men representing many views, is there really nothing going on with why it's not a court filled with better representation and diversity? No.
And then finally, the rub is that 'to get from here to there' requires some 'blunt force' - things like Biden committing to appoint a black woman, that might violate various ideals 'how it would be nice if it worked', but actually get us to a better place.
So I arrive somewhat reluctantly at seeing the move as a very good one, and objections as ranging from somewhat misguided - like if I just had my initial issue - to selfish and bigoted. People can come up with objections all day long, but you likely won't hear them solving the issue how to get to equity. So even if Biden's move is a cynical political one - right thing, partly wrong reason.
