Quote:
|
Originally Posted by strandinthewind
I get all of that - but that was one thing said by HR and it is true, esp. if the Court is to reemble the make of of American society, which most think it should  |
That's just ridiculous. Why on earth should the court "resemble the make of American society"? And on what criteria should this "resemblance" be based? Race and gender only? Why not age? Why not level of education? Why not sexual orientation? Why not geography? Why not annual income? Why not favorite type of music? Why not religion? I demand that there be at least one vegetarian on the court!
Is it nice to see an ethnic minority or a woman nominated to the court? Sure. But any nomination should be based on qualifications, and nothing but. We're appointing people to the Supreme Court here, not casting The Real World. What's important is that the candidates who are nominated are the ones who are the most qualified, and any argument for or against a nominee should be based only on that person's credentials and track record.
Did Mr. Reid raise these same concerns when Clinton nominated Breyer in 1994?