• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Presidents engage in identity politics when selecting a Supreme Court Justice?

Should Identity Politics play a role?

  • No. All options need to be considered

    Votes: 23 42.6%

  • Yes, but only if I agree with their political views

    Votes: 1 1.9%

  • Yes, diversity in the courts matters.

    Votes: 17 31.5%

  • Other. Please explain.

    Votes: 13 24.1%
  • Total voters
    54
jpevans said:
Well when he nominates one of the above, the right is still gonna whine & call reverse racism. So let's get this one out of the way 1st.
Click to expand...

Some certainly would, but Biden painted himself into a corner by making a stupid campaign promise due to identity politics.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Some certainly would, but Biden painted himself into a corner by making a stupid campaign promise due to identity politics.
Click to expand...
Post 11 addresses this nicely.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It would create over-representation of black SCOTUS members (from 11% to 22%) and continued under-representation of Asian (0%), Hispanic (11%) and Native American (0%) SCOTUS members.
Click to expand...
Maybe we can get some of the white guys to retire and make it more representative?
 
bongsaway said:
We use a document written over two hundred years ago as our guiding star, that's insane too.
Click to expand...

Not nearly as insane as allowing 5/4 of our nine robed umpires to (de facto) amend and/or ignore it.
 
In the perfect world a strong no. But that is what happens when a judge is picked now.
Been going on for many years.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Some certainly would, but Biden painted himself into a corner by making a stupid campaign promise due to identity politics.
Click to expand...

White people hate this shit.
 
Cardinal said:
Post 11 addresses this nicely.
Click to expand...

Its probably been addressed forty or fifty times already, but the carping goes on.

BTW - The Russia thing? It was a hoax.
 
Cardinal said:
Post 11 addresses this nicely.
Click to expand...

Nope, since none of the alternatives which I had listed were white (or male) and all of them are currently under-represented. Increasing the number of black SCOTUS justices, from 11% to 22%, on the SCOTUS results in over-representation of black SCOTUS members while maintaining under-representation of the other (non-white) racial/ethnic groups.
 
Blue Dog said:
The judge most qualified should be selected REGARDLESS of gender,race or creed.

Identity politics should not even apply.
Click to expand...
here's a conversation my wife and i had...


what if there is a tie? you know, equally qualified candidates.
 
bongsaway said:
Maybe we can get some of the white guys to retire and make it more representative?
Click to expand...

That is likely to happen eventually, but not on Joe “Where am I?” Biden’s watch with a 50/50 Senate ‘majority’. BTW, white guys will become a minority (44%) on the SCOTUS after a black woman is appointed.
 
We have white identity politics by default in this country. Especially in the Republican Party.

The real problem is that the racists somehow ALSO want to pretend that their world is genderblind.
 
it makes one wonder how many minority women HAVE ALREADY been passed over previously.
 

How stupid do you think we are? Obviously if he had announced an Asian you’d just ask why he didn’t choose [insert long laundry list of other demographics].
 
American said:
Well no one else was qualified for 200 years. Why can't you be truthful about history?
Click to expand...

No one else was qualified!

Yeah maybe that's cause society was busy keeping black people and women from even attending school. So why can't YOU be truthful about history?

That's the ****ing point. Systemic racism results in white privilege and overrepresentation of some demographics and overrepresentation of others.

Just because there is no longer explicit de jure discrimination doesn't mean it all of a sudden disappeared. Whichever one of Biden's black women candidates gets nominated, I'm guaranteeing we won't have to sit through a long rant about how she was drunk all through her college years in some lame attempt to gain sympathy for her confirmation.

Even with "affirmative action," minorities always have to FLY to places where privileged white folk can hop to. And Kavanaugh is the embodiment of white, male privilege.

And America would be a much better place if Biden actually chose an Angela Davis-loving black female Marxist to the bench. Instead, what we're going to get is some centrist whose jurisprudence isn't that different from Merrick Garland so white people's feelings don't get hurt so she can actually make it through the confirmation process.
 
Last edited:
CaughtInThe said:
here's a conversation my wife and i had...


what if there is a tie? you know, equally qualified candidates.
Click to expand...

And there’s the rub. Just my opinion here, but I would rather see a competition over the “most qualified “ judges be the primary focus instead of the emphasis on identity politics and litmus tests. I understand the latter is inevitable, but at least the qualifications would be impeccable from the get go.
 
i wonder how many MORE qualified candidates have been passed over throughout our history.

but, yeah, it needs to come down to the most qualified. the problem is there are probably gonna be a bunch of the most qualified. then it gets hard.
 
Why do you assume that “most qualified” is the end consideration and not the starting one?
 
Cardinal said:
Why do you assume that “most qualified” is the end consideration and not the starting one?
Click to expand...

I never made such an assumption. “Most qualified” should be the starting one. That was the point I was driving at.
 
Blue Dog said:
I never made such an assumption. “Most qualified” should be the starting one. That was the point I was driving at.
Click to expand...
And what makes you think it wasn’t?
 
There is no 'most qualified' candidate, in terms of jurisprudence. A great many are more than qualified.

Therefore, you choose a candidate based upon other attributes, and one of them is the life perspective they bring to the table, another is political calculus, and another is their ideologies.

So, hat's new? This is no different than Republicans choosing an anti-abortion Conservative Caucasian male. Yet now, the Republican voters in this thread try to sound oh so . . . altruistic. Yeah, right!
 
Cardinal said:
How stupid do you think we are?
Click to expand...

You don’t want me to answer that.

Cardinal said:
Obviously if he had announced an Asian you’d just ask why he didn’t choose [insert long laundry list of other demographics].
Click to expand...

Probably, but why announce the specific ‘required’ race or ethnicity in advance (other than to play identity politics)?

Simply supply a ‘short’ list (of at least two dozen possibilities) and let the chips fall where they may. I am reasonably confident that Biden’s selection will be highly qualified.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…