Toobin: Diversity Considerations "nearly as old as the Court itself"
I probably know less about Sonia Sotomayor's judicial record than even the Senate Majority Leader, but I found this Jeffrey Toobin observation about cultural tokenism on the Supreme Court to be an interesting bit of historical context:
In the early days of the republic, when regional disputes were the foremost conflict of the era, nominees were generally defined by their home turfs. So Presidents came to honor an informal tradition of preserving a New England seat, a Virginia seat, a Pennsylvania seat, and a New York seat on the Court. In the nineteenth century, as a torrent of European immigrants transformed American society, religious differences took on a new significance, and Presidents used Supreme Court appointments to recognize the new arrivals' growing power. In 1836, Andrew Jackson made Roger B. Taney the first occupant of what became known as the Catholic seat on the Court, and that tradition carried forward intermittently for more than a century, with Edward White, Joseph McKenna, Pierce Butler, Frank Murphy, and William J. Brennan, Jr., occupying the chair. In 1916, Woodrow Wilson nominated Louis D. Brandeis, establishing the Jewish seat, which later went, with brief overlapping periods, to Benjamin N. Cardozo, Felix Frankfurter, and Abe Fortas.
Damon Root on Sotomayor here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
it was an interesting piece.
we also got to find out that the score is 6-3 in favor of the papist conspiracy. 🙂
"Toobin: Diversity Considerations "nearly as old as the Court itself""
Toobin: The Right Skin and Genitalia Considerations "nearly as old as the Court itself"
FTFY
But as long as we're going to play that game, was she really the best female Hispanic they could find? If you're going to rule out 85% of the population off the top, you better pick the very best of what's left over.
The Right Skin and Genitalia Considerations "nearly as old as the Court itself"
That wasn't what the article said at all. But you knew that.
But you knew that.
Sure about that?
All I see is an article on panthers.
All I see is an article on panthers.
Are you saying Sonia is a cougar?
John-David -- Fixed, thanks, and sorry. Though you do have to admit that the panther story was pretty cool.
Dammit, can you re-link the panther story? I'd actually click through for that.
Will they go ahead and put this fucking woman up for confirmation so people will stop talking about it?
It's funny I think that if the right were not attacking her so much maybe more liberals would realize that she's certainly nothing to get enthusiastic about. Obama could have picked a liberal Scalia but instead went with a liberal O'Connor...
"That wasn't what the article said at all. But you knew that.
Bullshit. The article is saying that identity politics has historically played a role, so skin and pussy is the just next logical step.
"It's funny I think that if the right were not attacking her so much maybe more liberals would realize that she's certainly nothing to get enthusiastic about."
No. That's a strawman beaten 24/7 by the likes of Ed Schultz on MSNBC. No one has attacted her in several days. Gingrich even formally apoplogized for calling her now famous quote proof that she's a racist.
MNG,
How come no one on the left is complaining that she was originally a Bush 41 appointee? I would think the left has a lot more to lose with this appointment than the right does. crocadile tears, methinks...
"No one has attacted her in several days."
Holy shit is that stupid. If they ever need a retard on the bench they could look to you.
If you can figure out how to work your computer go to any major conservative website (NRO, Weekly Standard, etc.) and see how "noone has attacted [sic] her in several days."
Retard.
domo
The left is praising her for the same reason it did Clinton when the right hated him so much. It's stupid for sure. It's the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing I guess.
What I would say to liberals is: what do you like about her? What about her judicial philosophy as revealed in her rulings do you like?
"If you can figure out how to work your computer go to any major conservative website (NRO, Weekly Standard, etc.) and see how "noone [sic] has attacted [sic] her in several days.""
Discussion and opinions on websites are not "attacks".
"What I would say to liberals is: what do you like about her? What about her judicial philosophy as revealed in her rulings do you like?"
You might as well ask a sack of bolts. They have no idea either.
Latina, with that last comment you are officially crowned King of Retards. Hail your Majesty! Now go play with something shiny and let the people with mental ages over 9 have a conversation.
MNG
Gosh! You're so smart!
Yes I am. And you, my friend, are not.
In other news, the sky is blue!
"Yes I am. And you, my friend, are not.
In other news, the sky is blue!"
You might consider halving your asshole meds.
I'm inclined to agree that a good deal of the MSM is manufacturing outrage over any scrap they can find. They have to. It's what they do.
Hambone
You just missed your King.
I'm a Latina. And I would bring new dimensions to the Supreme Court.
As long as you bring those titties you can be Chief Justice.
"Hambone
You just missed your King."
Obama? Where?
You might consider halving your asshole meds.
wouldn't asshole meds prevent one being an asshole? wouldn't doubling them be more what you meant? discuss.
domo
Don't tease the retards. They are deceptively strong.
"Don't tease the retards. They are deceptively strong."
Retards plural? Better a retard than a misanthrope.
Hambone
You obviously missed the gist of the 10:44 post, but retards often are like that.
dhex, that was the most stunning takeaway for me. Is American now 67% Catholic or something? For over-representation in high-attainment fields relative to population figures, Catholics are doing almost as well as Jews these days. I may have to go back to church and get in on the conspiracy.
The other interesting thing about the article (sorry to bust your balloon, Magic Latina) was the stuff about regional diversity. Unfortunately Toobin treats regional diversity's fading as an evolutionary process rather than questioning why it's any less important now than it was in the early 19th century. Looking at my red state/blue state maps, I could make a pretty good case that there still is a lot of diversity of opinion sorted by region in these here United States. Why shouldn't the court reflect that?
Catholics are also good at engaging in promiscuous behavior that belies the Church values concerning matrimony and sanctity of life. A Catholic upbringing can make one capable of extraordinary feats of cognitive dissonance. Certainly a good attribute for the Surpreme Court.
For over-representation in high-attainment fields relative to population figures, Catholics are doing almost as well as Jews these days.
and that is why we've missed you so, mr. cavanaugh.
i thought it was interesting that there used to be a "catholic seat" just like there was a jewish seat, like our current "woman's seat" and "black guy seat" situations.
but the regional diversity issue is even more interesting; perhaps part of the reason it's being treated as a vestigial tail is because regional differences aren't nearly that important on the SCOTUS level? the whole thing is usually "racial angle, racial angle, ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION" but very little about whether a nominee is a yankee or a hillbilly or a latte-sipping city slicker.
The glaring omission is the libertarian seat.
region isn't defining anymore. it is clearly possible to be latte-sipping yankee hillbilly.
i've seen it.
MNG | June 4, 2009, 10:05am | #
Will they go ahead and put this fucking woman up for confirmation so people will stop talking about it?
Shut up shuttin' up.
The glaring omission is the libertarian seat.
Who is in the middle aged male WASP seat?
In the early days of the republic, when regional disputes were the foremost conflict of the era, nominees were generally defined by their home turfs.
Am I the only who thinks that there is a fundamental difference between geographic diversity quotas and racial/ethnic diversity quotas?
Congress, after all, is filled by geographic region; there are X reps from State A, Y reps from State B, etc. To me, this is completely and utterly distinct from saying Congress will have X reps will be white males, Y reps will be wise Latinas, etc.
Once you get into the religious quota seats, you have an argument. But geographic "diversity" is just pressing the point too far.
I'm just waiting for the libertarian, skeptic, left-handed, brown eyed atheist with a congenital heart defect seat to open up. I know it will happen any day now, because eventually every seat will apply to one and only one person in the entire country. Then after breezing through confirmation hearings, every 4th amendment case will be clothing optional under those hip robes, and mine will be a plush black terry-cloth.
Benjamin
Edit: Sorry terry-cloth of color.
Left-handed? Why not just appoint a sign-language-using gorilla?
I have a black, a woman, two Jews and a cripple.
Our Lord and Savior who Gives Us Hope and Change, is left-handed. Wait a second are you calling him a gorilla? Why not just call him a monkey you racist America hater? Of course now that you have revealed your self as a minority, you too can have a spot on the Supreme Court.
Benjamin
A gorilla I have no problem with. It's left-handed mutant freaks that give me the creeps.
I kid, I kid.
PL, you're just a closet left-hander. You probably sneak into airport bathroom stalls just to get some privacy to use your special left-handed scissors. Just come out of the stall PL!
Benjamin
You freaks don't even live as long as we with the right handedness. Which shows that God himself hates you.
Just so long as the Flying Spaghetti Monster loves me, I'm A-OK with that. I've course being born with a congenital heart defect did kind of tip me off to that biblical epiphany.
Now I'm contrite. You may live, but the rest of the left-handed fiends must leave the Earth.
I'll skip over the stimulating discussion of Catholicism and discuss the 'regional seats.'
In the old days, Supreme Court justices had to spend a lot of time serving as trial judges. Each Justice was assigned trial duty in a judicial district which included their home state.
There you have a fairly compelling reason for geographical diversity. If all the justices were from (say) New Hampshire, they might not be familiar with judicial procedures in such locales as South Carolina and Iowa. Bear in mind that federal trial courts then (as now) borrowed many of their laws and procedures from the states in which they sat.
Nowadays, Supreme Court justices don't 'ride circuit' (serve as trial judges), but spend their time mainly in Washington, D.C. hearing appeals on issues of federal law, where a knowledge of particular local procedure is not essential.
You can have an all-New York bench, and the lack of regional diversity would not in itself be a problem (except of course for the fact that Yankees suck).
"Am I the only who thinks that there is a fundamental difference between geographic diversity quotas and racial/ethnic diversity quotas?"
Especially since, originally, SCOTUS duties were part time for the justices, they also rode their circuit courts which had definite geographical boundaries.