New SCOTUS nominee

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Well generally I haven't noticed an emphasis on trying cases as a qualification anyway. Most of the commentary I've heard has described her lack of judiciary experience as more striking than her lack of trying cases. However, she does have an extensive background in constitutional law and papers particularly on the topic of First Amendment rights.

The point about her lack of trial experience just shows how out of touch she may be with the process. And it concerns me considerably. Next we will have people nominated who just graduated from law school. smh

I certainly understand being frustrated at the lack of representation of black women on the Court. I don't think that in and of itself is a good reason to oppose a qualified candidate.

But if the Black women are more qualified than the nominee, then it presents a problem. And whether Kagan is truly qualified is up in the air right now. There is no hard evidence showing that she is qualified. I suspect it has more to do with her Harvard credentials.

Nor do I think this choice necessarily indicates the ignoring or pandering to a specific demographic. Maybe I'm idealistic in this but I like to believe that the president is picking the best candidate (in his opinion of course) and thinking of the future of the court, not necessarily choosing his votes in this choice.

While we should not get caught up in assuming that EVERY move is made to gain votes, it isn't that farfetched to say that these women fit that bill.

Sorry, but adding rolling eyes to the end of every sentence makes your point more likely to get ignored in the future.

Right because that particular smiley is never used by others on this board.

But you did contradict yourself to some extent in both your comments

No, the comments weren't contradictory. I think that some people just want to twist things.