• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

O'Conner speaks out for more women & Sotomayor

A

Anonymous

Guest
Jun 24, 2009

'I'm very happy we're getting another woman on the court'
09:19

Some Republican senators, such as Alabama's Jeff Sessions, are still raising tough questions about Sonia Sotomayor, but the first woman on the Supreme Court has nothing but good things to say about President Obama's choice for the nation's next justice.

"I'm very happy we're getting another woman on the court, very," retired justice Sandra Day O'Connor said last night in an appearance on the CBS Late Show with David Letterman. O'Connor went on to note, "Our nearest neighbor is Canada, and Canada has also a nine-member Supreme Court. Their chief justice is a woman, and four of the justices are female in Canada. And they manage pretty well."

That's pretty emphatic praise for a Democratic nominee, considering that O'Connor was put on the top court by a Republican icon, President Ronald Reagan.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The article had another sentence I forgot to copy:

There is one woman on the nine-member U.S. Supreme Court: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Women make up 51% of the USA's population.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
The article had another sentence I forgot to copy:

There is one woman on the nine-member U.S. Supreme Court: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Women make up 51% of the USA's population.

So what?

Apparently Justice O'Conner and the author thought it was important...
 

VanC

Well-known member
The Constitution doesn't specify how many justices are to sit on the Supreme Court. The number is set by Congress as they see fit. Since being a member of some sort of group is now the #1 qualification for the Supreme Court, here are a couple of suggestions:

1. Congress should raise the number of justices of the Supreme Court to accomodate every group and subgroup that has a grievance against the United States. Start with say..... 20,000 and see how it goes. The actual number can be raised or lowered day by day to make sure everyone is represented in some manner.

2. Since that might be a bit unwieldy, let's put the number at a nice, round 100. Every group that is represented by at least 1% of the population would have at least one representative on the Supreme Court. There would be 51 women, 49 men, 13 blacks, etc. Every time a member representing a group dies or retires, they must be replaced by another member of that group.

I think it's high time we recognize that the Supreme Court should be a representative body, and should no longer be required to have a working knowledge of such an out-dated and inconvenient thing as the United States Constitution.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Ironic that you would accuse the Republicans of being racist on a thread about a racist individual that a liberal nominated based on race.
 
Top