Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court
-
wrote on 30 Mar 2022, 17:36 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
Good piece from Will.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/03/20/confirmation-questions-jackson-george-will/
He's still alive?
-
I cant find the table (though I am sure it is out there somewhere), but it was a table showing the final votes for each Supreme court justice when the US senators voted on them.
if I remember, judges nominated by Democrat presidents (at least in modern history) usually got a higher number of confirmation votes.
Depending on which side you are on, both statements are true:
- Republicans are more willing to put bias to the side and vote strictly on qualifications
or - Democrats are more likely to nominate judges who are more in the center and hold no political view.
LOL
wrote on 30 Mar 2022, 17:38 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
I cant find the table (though I am sure it is out there somewhere), but it was a table showing the final votes for each Supreme court justice when the US senators voted on them.
if I remember, judges nominated by Democrat presidents (at least in modern history) usually got a higher number of confirmation votes.
Depending on which side you are on, both statements are true:
- Republicans are more willing to put bias to the side and vote strictly on qualifications
or - Democrats are more likely to nominate judges who are more in the center and hold no political view.
LOL
. Number one is self-evident. Anything other than that is just playing silly booger or being as dense as a rock. I've never considered you dense.
- Republicans are more willing to put bias to the side and vote strictly on qualifications
-
Today's big Ketanji news is that she is unable to define what is a woman.
She was asked for her definition during today's hearing.
Her answer: no, I'm not a biologist.
Tucker is all over it.
wrote on 1 Apr 2022, 11:51 last edited by@Copper said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
Today's big Ketanji news is that she is unable to define what is a woman.
She was asked for her definition during today's hearing.
Her answer: no, I'm not a biologist.
-
wrote on 1 Apr 2022, 11:53 last edited by
Good to see maturity in power.
-
wrote on 1 Apr 2022, 11:58 last edited by
@89th said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
Good to see maturity in power.
He's not in power. He's a congressperson.
Wanna see maturity in power? Here you go:
-
wrote on 1 Apr 2022, 13:17 last edited by
The Washington Post has no biologists on staff either:
-
wrote on 1 Apr 2022, 13:23 last edited by
Hope they keep this up. The average person thinks it's ludicrous.
-
@89th said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
Good to see maturity in power.
He's not in power. He's a congressperson.
Wanna see maturity in power? Here you go:
wrote on 1 Apr 2022, 14:24 last edited by@George-K said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
@89th said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
Good to see maturity in power.
He's not in power. He's a congressperson.
Wanna see maturity in power? Here you go:
You shouldnt talk bad about President Trump!! LOL
-
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 13:04 last edited by George K 4 Mar 2022, 14:49
-
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 13:09 last edited by
That's ridiculous.
-
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 14:23 last edited by
We become so concentrated on what a judge's opinions are, we forget that the ultimate arbiter is supposed to be the constitution, not whatever some judge thinks.
-
We become so concentrated on what a judge's opinions are, we forget that the ultimate arbiter is supposed to be the constitution, not whatever some judge thinks.
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 14:34 last edited by@Horace said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
We become so concentrated on what a judge's opinions are, we forget that the ultimate arbiter is supposed to be the constitution, not whatever some judge thinks.
Precisely.
"Endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights..."
That sounds like "natural" to me.
And that's the whole point of the Declaration. Some rights are not bestowed on people by the government. We have them because we are human.
-
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 15:36 last edited by
LOL: https://reason.com/volokh/2022/04/01/kbj-i-would-note-that-i-am-pleased-to-be-the-sixth-woman-nominated-to-serve-on-the-supreme-court/?comments=true#comments
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Judge Jackson has submitted her responses to written questions. I haven't read through the entire packet, but I did find one error. She wrote on p. 64 of the PDF:
Finally, I would note that I am pleased to be the sixth woman nominated to serve on the Supreme Court.
Harriet Miers would beg to differ.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Women nominees to SCOTUS:
O'Connor
Ginsburg
Miers
Sotomayor
Kagan
Barrett
Jackson -
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 15:59 last edited by
Sloppy. A bad trait in a SCOTUS.
-
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 16:39 last edited by jon-nyc 4 Mar 2022, 16:46
The idea that Homo sapiens possess 'natural' rights is objectively false.
Go back 30,000 years on the Savanah and tell me what 'natural rights' we had.
The only way the sentiment can really be understood is as an 'ought', not an 'is'.
Something more like "there exist a set of fundamental rights that all humans should have, and society should recognize and respect those rights"
-
The idea that Homo sapiens possess 'natural' rights is objectively false.
Go back 30,000 years on the Savanah and tell me what 'natural rights' we had.
The only way the sentiment can really be understood is as an 'ought', not an 'is'.
Something more like "there exist a set of fundamental rights that all humans should have, and society should recognize and respect those rights"
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 17:06 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
The idea that Homo sapiens possess 'natural' rights is objectively false.
Go back 30,000 years on the Savanah and tell me what 'natural rights' we had.
The only way the sentiment can really be understood is as an 'ought', not an 'is'.
Something more like "there exist a set of fundamental rights that all humans should have, and society should recognize and respect those rights"
Yes, the concept of rights presupposes a society. Otherwise, one has a right to try, and that's about it.
-
The idea that Homo sapiens possess 'natural' rights is objectively false.
Go back 30,000 years on the Savanah and tell me what 'natural rights' we had.
The only way the sentiment can really be understood is as an 'ought', not an 'is'.
Something more like "there exist a set of fundamental rights that all humans should have, and society should recognize and respect those rights"
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 17:19 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
The idea that Homo sapiens possess 'natural' rights is objectively false.
Go back 30,000 years on the Savanah and tell me what 'natural rights' we had.
The only way the sentiment can really be understood is as an 'ought', not an 'is'.
Something more like "there exist a set of fundamental rights that all humans should have, and society should recognize and respect those rights"
In some philosophical discussion your point may have relevance, but the assumption of natural rights possessed by all is the platform on which the nation was built.
-
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 17:40 last edited by
If Ms. Jackson was applying for work on the Savanah that would be an important distinction.
-
If Ms. Jackson was applying for work on the Savanah that would be an important distinction.
-
@Copper In your own way you are conceding that such rights are conferred by society and don’t inhere to us by nature.
wrote on 3 Apr 2022, 18:21 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:
@Copper In your own way you are conceding that such rights are conferred by society and don’t inhere to us by nature.
Only if rights are necessarily enforceable. Maybe we have unalienable rights that don’t happen to be enforceable except by society. Or by being awesome at fighting.
