Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're not going to get the best person for the job when you exclude like 80+% of the legal profession solely on the basis of race and sex.
How do you know? If you eliminate 80% there's still a 1 out of 5 chance you get to choose the best.
Consider what the difference is among those qualified -- they are all probably pretty close. So, even if the person you believe is 'most qualified' is not picked, you still get a qualified, experienced judge.
Richard Posner, considered to be one of America's most intelligent jurists said this:
Quote:
"I sometimes ask myself: whether the nine current Supreme Court justices (I’m restoring Scalia to life for this purpose) are the nine best-qualified lawyers to be justices. Obviously not. Are they nine of the best 100? Obviously not. Nine of the best 1,000? I don’t think so. Nine of the best 10,000? I’ll give them that.”
How do you know? If you eliminate 80% there's still a 1 out of 5 chance you get to choose the best.
Consider what the difference is among those qualified -- they are all probably pretty close. So, even if the person you believe is 'most qualified' is not picked, you still get a qualified, experienced judge.
The very fact that a very large portion of the legal profession was excluded solely because they had the wrong sexual organs and were the wrong color, which have absolutely nothing to do with anyone's ability to read and interpret the law, puts doubt into HER candidacy for the job, and she should be rejected forthwith.
Besides that, she can't even articulate a reasonably plausible answer to a simple question.
And, given Biden's clear and overt racial and sexual bias, every Biden nominee going forward should also be rejected forthwith. Biden has no business nominating anyone to anything.
Honestly, she might be the most embarrassing SCOTUS justice ever. I look forward to laughing at her nonsense for the next few decades..... hopefully no ruling ever goes her way
Laugh as much as you want. She is immensely qualified and she is going to be on the court.
So, she's one of them judges that tried to use her power to go after Trump, and every time her appeals would be reversed in another court. So now we know why Biden chose her over Childs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by serger
Laugh as much as you want. She is immensely qualified and she is going to be on the court.
Eh, and all it takes is the GOP to take back the house and then impeach Joe and Harris and they can have this lady removed from office for being in cahoots with their corruption.
I only mention what others did as to sentencing because of the allegation that Judge Jackson had a reputation of going light on defendants. She did not.
Plus, as she noted, she was a trial judge and it is wrong to try to focus in on one case and try to make some wide-ranging presumptions about her habits or capabilities.
3 months is ultra light for a guy whose stash would have gotten him a free pass on Epstein's plane to Pedophile Island.
Biden specifically said he was going to nominate a black woman.
Then proceeded to pick her.
That alone disqualifies her in my book. You're not going to get the best person for the job when you exclude like 80+% of the legal profession solely on the basis of race and sex.
The Democrats and their handlers are the epitome of RACISM, with statements and actions such as this. It's un-American and unconstitutional.
I wonder how many people watched or listened to that portion of the hearing? At least 5 minutes worth before she gave her NON-ANSWER. A full description of one criminal's offenses, the horrific acts, the abuses to children, the images.....these weren't "just" a few (one should be enough, but I digress), these were videos in the dozens, still shots in the hundreds - HUNDREDS of victims.
Sentencing guidelines for these crimes were up to 10 yrs in prison. Attorney request was just 2 years. KBJ sentenced this man to 3 months. When asked why......well, do yourself a favor - watch a clip of her response. Not one part of her "answer" speaks to why she only gave 3 months when his crimes were irrefutable. None of those kids will ever be whole again. She doesn't give a damn, and her, "I'm a mother; those acts were heinous, they were egregious" comment is meaningless when she sentences a guy to just 3 months. ANYONE who defends her is soft on child pornography, pedophilia and sexual abuse of minors. There is zero excuse for this, and KBJ proved that with her "answer".
I completely agree, her sentencing record is very troubling. She actually was quoted as apologizing to that defendant as if he were the victim and then turns out that the 3 month conviction didn't do a darn thing, he was re-sentenced again 6 years later for the same thing. She is a judge that was weak on sentencing, forgiving to criminals and could barely answer questions directly, when asked. She used the excuse she doesn't know, it's not her line of work for several answers to wiggle out of answering direct questions asked of her.
What a huge disappointment. Biden should have nominated Michelle Child's.
Also, when she stated she is a mother, you would think a normal mother would want to protect children not be lenient on the worst scum of the earth.
I completely agree, her sentencing record is very troubling. She actually was quoted as apologizing to that defendant as if he were the victim and then turns out that the 3 month conviction didn't do a darn thing, he was re-sentenced again 6 years later for the same thing. She is a judge that was weak on sentencing, forgiving to criminals and could barely answer questions directly, when asked. She used the excuse she doesn't know, it's not her line of work for several answers to wiggle out of answering direct questions asked of her.
Yeah, Ketanji Brown Jackson is on her way to became the new Susan Dlott althought then karma didn't bite her yet.
Biden specifically said he was going to nominate a black woman.
Then proceeded to pick her.
That alone disqualifies her in my book. You're not going to get the best person for the job when you exclude like 80+% of the legal profession solely on the basis of race and sex.
So her extensive qualifications and background are dismissed in addition to the way she handled herself. You can't disqualify her based on her qualifications, if you do then you need to do the same for many of the current supreme court justices because she excels.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
