Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
No, she didn't say that a Latina judge was "more fit." She said "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
I think "more fit" somewhat skews that statement.
Reading the whole thing in context, it seems clear to me that the point she was trying to make was that while it's a laudable and proper goal for judges to set aside their personal biases when ruling, this cannot really be done completely, and successful attempts to do it can only come if the judge recognizes and acknowledges what his or her experiential biases are. I think she was also taking a stab at holding up white males as the standard by which to measure all other judges, as though white males are some exempt from experiential biases and as though the biases of judges who are not white males are measured by how they compare to the "non-biased" white male.
Everyone has biases based on experience, background, etc. You can't ingore them or set them aside to rule on the law unless you understand what they are to begin with.
No why didn't I think to link the whole speech when I posted the long excerpt in post 21? Oh, wait . . . .  |
didn't see it...my bad.
__________________
Law and Order: Gotham - “In the Criminal Justice System of Gotham City the people are represented by three separate, yet equally important groups. The police who investigate crime, the District Attorneys who prosecute the offenders, and the Batman. These are their stories.”
|