catsittingstill: (Default)
[personal profile] 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.

Date: 2009-05-07 06:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randwolf.livejournal.com
A coin, tossed, that always comes up 50% heads no more honest than one that comes up 90% tails. So I say fairness might be four, five, or six--three or seven at the outside. You're right--what we've got is slanted, and I am all for more women in high office. The whole system is slanted. I don't know what a truly egalitarian government and legal system would look like, but I'm fairly sure it wouldn't look like what we have now.

Meantime, as I've said in other contexts, the Senate is a problem. I really don't know enough history, but I am beginning to wonder if there has ever been a time when the US Senate has not been corrupt.

Date: 2009-05-10 08:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catsittingstill.livejournal.com
My major concern is that if we set a range, and say the lower end of the range is good enough, then the lower end of the range is all we will *ever* get. So if we say "three to seven" we'll get three women, and never any more.

Date: 2009-05-10 08:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] randwolf.livejournal.com
unh-hunh. Maybe the thing to say is just "more women on the Court", and not give a number. If pressed for a number we can say that any number we give will become a minimum. To judge from the way the wingnuts are acting right now, it's going to be hard just to get to two. With Jeff Sessions ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary committee it's going to be hard to even get a moderate justice approved.

Next, the Senate. I wonder how many moderate and liberal women we can get into the Senate?

Profile

catsittingstill: (Default)
catsittingstill

February 2024

S M T W T F S
    1 23
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 8th, 2025 03:28 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios