• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I have no idea why he’d pick a justice like Jackson

    If the parties were both the same, you would have an idea since it would be the same reason Biden did it. But you can’t say that since you know Trump would not pick a left-wing black woman for a justice as that is absolutely absurd.

    So thank you for proving my point.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      If the parties were both the same, you would have an idea

      That’s nonsense. Can you explain how Bush Sr picked both Souter and Thomas? He’s the same guy, so explaining the gulf between the candidates should be easy.

      But you can’t say that since you know Trump would not pick a left-wing black woman

      Bush Jr picked liberal feminist Harriet Myers less than a month before he switched to rabid conservative fanatic Samuel Alito. Myers was shot down by Biden’s judiciary committee. Can you explain that?

      Can you explain the gulf between Merrick Garland and Sonya Sotomayer? Both Obama nominees. How about the distance between Sandra Day O’Conner and Robert Bork? Both Reagan nominees.

      You don’t know your judicial history. You certainly don’t know how Trump or Biden make political decisions.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Souter and Thomas were right-wing and calling Harriet Miers a feminist or even suggesting she is a capable justice on the level of justice Jackson is proof that you are not serious.

        Again- if the parties are the same, Trump and Biden would have the same reason to pick her.

        Which you are claiming is not the case.

        Which, again, proves my point.

        Either they are the same or they’re not the same. You want it both ways.

        And no, I’m not going to explain anything while you insist on having it both ways, sorry.

        But… since you know your judicial history and know why they pick justices, you can still explain what that same reason is.

        So what is it?

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Souter and Thomas were right-wing

          Souter was a reliable liberal vote for the entirety of his term on the bench. And he was from the same Harvard legal school that dominates the Supreme Court to this day.

          calling Harriet Miers a feminist or even suggesting she is a capable justice on the level of justice Jackson

          This is gibberish. She’s not a feminist? She’s not capable of the level of justice? What on earth are you even talking about? Miers had been a sponsor of the Women’s Studies department at HBU since the 90s, ran multiple successful legal firms hearing cases at all levels of the judiciary in both Texas and California, and headed up the Texas State Bar before joining Bush Jr as his personal lawyer. She was right in line with conservative Democrats appointed by Carter, Clinton, and Obama, and could easily have stood in for Ruth Bader Ginsberg or Ketanji Brown Jackson as a professional judge.

          Either they are the same or they’re not the same

          They are the same. They consistently put up candidates from the same insular club of Harvard Ivy League SCOTUS clerks. When Presidents step outside of line - as with the Miers nomination or the Bork nomination - the Senate reins them back in, regardless of the quality of the candidate.

          since you know your judicial history and know why they pick justices, you can still explain what that same reason is.

          There’s your reasoning. Its the Biden Judiciary that controls who has sat the bench and who has been disqualified for the last 40 years. And that’s why the SCOTUS sucks today. Jackson is not exemplary. She’s just another Harvard lemming, groomed to strictly defer to conservative hegemony that dominates legal jurisprudence.

          Trump may well pick someone outside that niche, but the Senate will kill the nomination and force him back into his lane. Then he’ll queue up yet one more cloistered nun of the Harvard Law Review, just like his peers in the Democratic Party.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                “Christian Feminism Today.”

                Are you fucking serious?

                No, no you’re not. Because the entire argument that article makes for her being a feminist is her weakly indicating she wasn’t entirely anti-abortion.

                Either you didn’t think I’d read that or you have an incredibly misogynistic idea of what a feminist is.

                So I think there’s no point in continuing.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Are you fucking serious?

                  My guy, you want news stories from a twenty year old story via a search engine that doesn’t work. This is what you get. I’m sorry I couldn’t find Gloria Steinem’s “In defense is Harriet Miers” LiveJournal page, that URL was beyond me.

                  Because the entire argument that article makes for her being a feminist is her weakly indicating she wasn’t entirely anti-abortion.

                  You’re being nakedly dishonest. The article lauds her intelligence and independence and concludes she was ousted for being an unreliable conservative block vote.

                  This is exactly why both parties keep returning to the Harvard Law Review well when selecting candidates. Any deviance from that singular legal institution is intolerable.

                  It’s central to the case that both of these parties are putting up the same people.