According to CNN, Diversity on High Court Desirable, President Bush said this of his imminent nomination to replace the retiring Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor: "I will pick a person who can do the job. But I am mindful that diversity is one of the strengths of the country." If only this country had a decent definition of diversity. Would that we could get back, all the way back, to the diversity of the individual spelled out in the Declaration of Independence. This diversity derives, interestingly enough, from the equality we share in the possession of rights as human beings. I know at least one sitting justice who understands this. The president would do well to stick to his campaign commitment to nominate justices like Thomas and Scalia.
A promise to choose "a person who can do the job" is not what we’d expect to hear from someone who places excellence first, period. All kinds of people, including Ruth Bader Ginsburg, can "do the job." And what is "the job," Mr. President?
It’s clear to me that Bush is thinking politics ("diversity") first and excellence second.
We had better hope that we luck out with this appointment. Because if we are to take his words seriously, Bush does not see this opportunity in the way that we movement conservatives do.
Let’s just hope that "diversity" doesn’t mean Alberto Gonzales.
Let’s further hope that "do[ing] the job" is referring to the job of Scalia, Thomas or Rehnquist, and not that of Ginsburg, Souter, Stevens, etc.
I’m not incredibly enthused by these recent comments.
With three Catholics and a kinda Catholic on SCOTUS I say it’s time to appoint a hard-boiled fundamentalist with a foot-long beard. Next comes an Orthodox Rabbi.
The criteria is simple-interpret the law and not make law. Some even go so far as to say a Justice needs to understand the impact of the ruling on people. Sorry, but Congress should pass better laws.