[Wulfschilde]

Man how mad is that guy going to be when a handmaid is on the SCOTUS.

[Pants-of-dog]

It is odd to discuss one’s fertility in what is essentially a job interview.

But I assume women are used to it.

[Wulfschilde]

Kavanaugh's new album is out. It has the hit singles "I like beer", "It's over for you Hoes" and "Prep School Bangin'".

[Doug64]

[Julian658]

RBG only hired one black person to clerk for her as Judge in the Supreme Court and before the Supreme Court. We are talking about a very long career here. Meanwhile Judge Kavanaugh has already hired many more blacks than RBG. His clerks are very diverse.

[late]

RBG only hired one black person to clerk for her as Judge in the Supreme Court and before the Supreme Court. We are talking about a very long career here. Meanwhile Judge Kavanaugh has already hired many more blacks than RBG. His clerks are very diverse.

Let's stick with her era, how diverse were the other justices of that era, that would be a fair comparison.

[Julian658]

Let's stick with her era, how diverse were the other justices of that era, that would be a fair comparison.

She was a champion of equality her whole career and yet she hired only one black law clerk in an era where diversity was common everywhere in America. She became a judge many decades after the civil rights act and affirmative action. She was not a judge during Jim Crow.

People are pointing out the lack of diversity in a photo of RBG's staff
https://www.indy100.com/article/ruth-ba ... rt-9714436

Ruth Bader Ginsburg can learn something from Brett Kavanaugh
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

[late]

She was a champion of equality her whole career and yet she hired only one black law clerk in an era where diversity was common everywhere in America. She became a judge many decades after the civil rights act and affirmative action. She was not a judge during Jim Crow.

You didn't answer my question.

So let me respond to your BS from a different direction. Yes, she was a champion of equality, that is what was important. Trying to smear her is trying to diminish those accomplishments.

Which gets us to the crux of the matter, now doesn't it?

[Julian658]

You didn't answer my question.

So let me respond to your BS from a different direction. Yes, she was a champion of equality, that is what was important. Trying to smear her is trying to diminish those accomplishments.

Which gets us to the crux of the matter, now doesn't it?

I don't think she has a racist bone in her. She is a great woman. I suspect the pool of applicants was low in diversity and she likely picked the most qualified. I am not trying to smear her at all. However, if she had been a conservative male Republican the story would be quite different.

[late]

I don't think she has a racist bone in her. She is a great woman. I suspect the pool of applicants was low in diversity and she likely picked the most qualified. I am not trying to smear her at all. However, if she had been a conservative male Republican the story would be quite different.

That was a smear.

No one made you go there. Twice.

Which raises the question of why you went there. Occams Razor offers one possibility.

[Julian658]

That was a smear.

No one made you go there. Twice.

Which raises the question of why you went there. Occams Razor offers one possibility.

I went there not to smear her, but the point out the hypocrisy on the left.

[Rich]

Yes, she was a champion of equality,

No she wasn't she was a lying dishonest hypocrite, who did nothing, absolute nothing to address the huge levels of inequality in America between Jews and non Jews, whether that is determined by religion or biological decent. You see that's always the problem with the people who claim that they want equality, it always turns out that they are a lot more concerned about some inequalities than others. One of the big inequalities in America is the supreme court itself with its unaccountable judges for life, lording it over the ordinary American citizen and voter. Virtue signalling about select inequalities is one of the major ways in America to amass wealth, status and power.

[Doug64]

No she wasn't she was a lying dishonest hypocrite, who did nothing, absolute nothing to address the huge levels of inequality in America between Jews and non Jews, whether that is determined by religion or biological decent.

Even if true, how was that her job as a justice on the Supreme Court? Courts are supposed to act as referees ensuring that constitutions, laws, and regulations are followed, not set policy. Setting policy is the job of legislatures, private businesses, and the people themselves. It is, in fact, the Left’s treatment of the courts as another branch of the legislature that has gotten us into this mess, and why they are so terrified of Originalists like Barrett.

[Wulfschilde]

Acrobatic arguments about racism are pretty funny. Like, is it racist if I say that I don't care what the race of RGB's law clerks was?

[Pants-of-dog]

Even if true, how was that her job as a justice on the Supreme Court? Courts are supposed to act as referees ensuring that constitutions, laws, and regulations are followed, not set policy. Setting policy is the job of legislatures, private businesses, and the people themselves. It is, in fact, the Left’s treatment of the courts as another branch of the legislature that has gotten us into this mess, and why they are so terrified of Originalists like Barrett.

Can you give an example of judges setting policy? Thnaks.

[late]

No she wasn't she was a lying dishonest hypocrite, who did nothing, absolute nothing to address the huge levels of inequality in America between Jews and non Jews, whether that is determined by religion or biological descent. You see that's always the problem with the people who claim that they want equality, it always turns out that they are a lot more concerned about some inequalities than others. One of the big inequalities in America is the supreme court itself with its unaccountable judges for life, lording it over the ordinary American citizen and voter. Virtue signalling about select inequalities is one of the major ways in America to amass wealth, status and power.

Got it, you want miracles.

You know where we can find a miracle worker? Burning bush that isn't on a teenager?

[Drlee]

I went there not to smear her, but the point out the hypocrisy on the left.

What left? You think Ginsburg was left?

Hardly.

@Pants-of-dog Can you give an example of judges setting policy? Thnaks.

School Busing.

[late]

Even if true, how was that her job as a justice on the Supreme Court? Courts are supposed to act as referees ensuring that constitutions, laws, and regulations are followed, not set policy. Setting policy is the job of legislatures, private businesses, and the people themselves. It is, in fact, the Left’s treatment of the courts as another branch of the legislature that has gotten us into this mess, and why they are so terrified of Originalists like Barrett.

Actually, one of the worst SC courts in American history was the one FDR was saddled with. They did policy.

But they weren't the first.

Actually, the first was the first.

Originalism today is just a label telling everyone which flavor of kook you are.
http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2020/09/confro ... myths.html

[Doug64]

Can you give an example of judges setting policy? Thnaks.

Any court ruling that’s based on “penumbra and emanations” and/or “substantive due process”—it’s amazing, how many rights can be discovered that eluded justices for generations, even centuries, with those four words.

[Drlee]

IMO the courts are far to powerful these days. They are, at the end of the day, a substitute for compromise at the very essence of democracy. Or call it consensus if you prefer. We have gotten to the point (since Democrat Harry Reid ended the filibuster that virtually every law is challenged in court. The founders never imagined this. The conservative position is that congress makes laws, the president signs and implements them and the courts are the representative of the constitution and by default the individual American. They are the protector against the "tyranny of the masses" and government overreach of individual rights.

The SCOTUS hears far too many cases dealing with administrivia and petty partisan disputes.

Good examples would be school busing on the democrat side and trying to overturn Obamacare on the right. It is not supposed to be easy to overturn legislation nor is it supposed to be easy to write it. Both sides have forgotten that.