Jump to content

Ketanji Brown Jackson sworn in as first black woman on the U.S. Supreme Court


onthedarkside

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Just like Trump did with his choices. Only he was virtue signalling to the fundamentalist white Christians.

 

The difference may be that Trump was smart enough to NOT actually voice his reasons.  Biden, for his 50 years of experience in Washington, could not do so. He had to, for various reasons, explicitly telegraph what he was doing. There were political debts to be paid, and Biden paid them. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

They don't already have role models? They need more at the expense of black women who have never had any? You really can't get the point can you?

Why does a role model need to be the same colour as you ?

Judges are also there to judge , it isn't their job to be role models 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I do agree that it was a an appalling situation in 1960's segregated USA , but that is a long time ago and a different generation .

   You would be peeved if a woman got promoted for the sole reason she was a woman and you missed out because you are male .

  That situation is very likely to have happened in this promotion "to a top Judge) , three woman got nominated for the sole reason they were female , which means its quite probable that some males missed out on being nominated and promoted  , because they weren't female 

They were not ‘nominated for the sole reason they are women’, stop making stuff up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She should stick to what’s relevant and not rise to politicized baiting.

 

And when she does this we get outrage from the rightwing.

 

 

 

She was concerned about upsetting the left wing by stating what a woman was . 

  There would have been outrage from certain groups , is she answered the question honestly 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You asked for an example of people being denied their Constitutional rights based on Gender, I did just that.

 

Now, is Justice Brown Jackson qualified for the job?

Yes, she is fully qualified .

She fully met all the requirements for the position , as set by Biden .

Qualified on both requirements 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, she is fully qualified .

She fully met all the requirements for the position , as set by Biden .

Qualified on both requirements 

Exactly as Trump's picks met his requirements as set by the Federalist Society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

She should stick to what’s relevant and not rise to politicized baiting.

 

And when she does this we get outrage from the rightwing.

 

 

 

Exactly. Some focus on just one aspect of her reply and miss the most important part in my opinion, which was:

 

"as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law, and I decide.' In other words, she said context matters – which is true in both biology and society. I think that's a pretty good answer for a judge"

Edited by Bkk Brian
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, she is fully qualified .

She fully met all the requirements for the position , as set by Biden .

Qualified on both requirements 

That'a a lie. 

She was fully qualified as a judge.

I consider your attacks racist.

As if many black women weren't fully qualified.

 

Edited by Jingthing
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Exactly. Some focus on just one aspect of her reply and miss the most important part in my opinion, which was:

 

"as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law, and I decide.' In other words, she said context matters – which is true in both biology and society. I think that's a pretty good answer for a judge"

Excellent, but it doesn’t dent the ‘outrage’.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Exactly. Some focus on just one aspect of her reply and miss the most important part in my opinion, which was:

 

"as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law, and I decide.' In other words, she said context matters – which is true in both biology and society. I think that's a pretty good answer for a judge"

It's a great answer but its way too intelligent for the low information right wing culture warriors.

Their current number one political scapegoat is transgender women.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The difference may be that Trump was smart enough to NOT actually voice his reasons.  Biden, for his 50 years of experience in Washington, could not do so. He had to, for various reasons, explicitly telegraph what he was doing. There were political debts to be paid, and Biden paid them. 

You may be right, although Trump obviously was not going to offend half the voting base of America by stating he was appointing justices who would overturn abortion, keep guns, and discriminate against minorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Biden only stated two requirements and she fully qualified for both of them

So you actually thought he meant he might pick a black female burger flipper?

 

Stop insinuating that this new justice is not a very qualified jurist. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

You may be right, although Trump obviously was not going to offend half the voting base of America by stating he was appointing justices who would overturn abortion, keep guns, and discriminate against minorities.

Uh huh 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

She was concerned about upsetting the left wing by stating what a woman was . 

  There would have been outrage from certain groups , is she answered the question honestly 

How do you know what her motives were, did she tell you?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Exactly. Some focus on just one aspect of her reply and miss the most important part in my opinion, which was:

 

"as a judge, what I do is I address disputes. If there's a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law, and I decide.' In other words, she said context matters – which is true in both biology and society. I think that's a pretty good answer for a judge"

She wasnt asked to make a judgement though, she was asked her personal opinion 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...