A quick thought on the Supreme Court situation

[catsittingstill]

Women are slightly over half the population.  So women should be slightly over half the Supreme Court.  There are nine Supreme Court judges, so that means five of them should be women.

The most we've ever had is two.  George W. Bush left us with only one.  Of course the next Supreme Court judge should be a woman.  The next four Supreme Court judges should be women.  Unless Ruth Bader Ginsberg retires in that time, in which case the next five Supreme Court judges should be women.

Duh.

And I'm being moderate and patient, here.  If I was really going for true equality and fairness, the Supreme Court should have only women on it for the next one hundred and ninety years, at which point a single male would be allowed to serve and twelve years later, a second male would be allowed to serve, with the court only opening up to allow a total of four males sixteen years after that.

Comments

Re: OMG NO!!!

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Good point.

I admit the disparity with respect to gender is 1) more personal for me because I am female and 2) more striking (at least to me) with respect to the numbers (slightly over half the population is female but more like 5-10% of the population are gay. However you're right that I shouldn't overlook this.

I have absolutely no objection to getting a justice who is both female and gay (that would be cool!) and indeed I had the impression that a couple of people whose names are coming up as possiblities *are* in committed long-term homosexual relationships. I would be equally happy with a superior justice who happened to be gay and not female as I would with a superior justice who happened to be female and not gay if we can't get a superior justice who is both. If we can't find a superior candidate, then I would be happy with an adequate female *or* gay (or both) candidate.

Re: OMG NO!!!

[pocketnaomi.livejournal.com]

I agree about the numbers disparity, but I think it's most critical to have one member of a group there, to be able to speak up about things which their experience may have taught them which the rest just wouldn't otherwise consider. I think you're entirely right that the court should have more women, but I'm more eager right now to see one gay member, of either sex.

AFAIK, the specific openly gay candidates under consideration all do happen to be women, though, so we may get both. I haven't researched them as judicial candidates, so I haven't the foggiest idea whether I approve of them as judges, but the demographics would sure be nice.