Chinahand Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 I don't really know what to make about the accusations against Trump's Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh. A part of me thinks a Supreme Court Justice should be a figure of absolute integrity and so it is right and proper that their entire life is examined for inappropriate behaviour. Another part thinks that if an event which occurred when they were 17 is going to be used against them when they are being considered for a job in their 50s things are going a little crazy. The incident sounds nasty - but as the girl managed to pull herself away it is hard to know just how serious it could have become. His behaviour was highly inappropriate, but at the same time shouldn't some account be taken for his youth. Is this incident on its own enough to disqualify him from the court? I guess many more-radically minded democrats will see it as exemplifying an underlying misogyny, but if there are no other incidents over his entire adult career is such poor behaviour really a total disqualification? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 Seeing as the justice system in the US can be so utterly mental with executions still a thing and life imprisonments for the crime of being black and poor I think it is essential that those handing down the judgements should absolutely be people of the highest moral fibre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 14 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Seeing as the justice system in the US can be so utterly mental with executions still a thing and life imprisonments for the crime of being black and poor I think it is essential that those handing down the judgements should absolutely be people of the highest moral fibre. Care to show an example of a person being jailed for life just because they were “black and poor” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 Care to respond to the original post instead of dribbling after me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 25 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Care to respond to the original post instead of dribbling after me? You made a scathing comment about the USA legal system and I would be interested in seeing your evidence. We can return to the op after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted September 17, 2018 Author Share Posted September 17, 2018 Try these figures collected by Slate Magazine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 What's the point? You are utterly incapable of having a reasoned debate. Just for you though here is a link https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/us-prisoners-sentences-life-non-violent-crimes I can't really be bothered following it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted September 17, 2018 Author Share Posted September 17, 2018 Teapot - why the ad hominem - you've responded to Neil, there's really no need to add agro. Neil - surely your aware of the US's very poor record of Judicial equality? The causes of it are very complex, but my understanding is that even after adjusting for things like poverty, lack of education, etc US Blacks are treated considerably worse than Whites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 27 minutes ago, Chinahand said: Try these figures collected by Slate Magazine. Thanks China. Makes for grim reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 It’s not really the probity or otherwise of judicial nominees it’s the total corruption, in the case of the senate, of the politicised appointment process, where the question of ability to be a judge and apply the law without fear or favour is now secondary to “fixing” the court to impose a majority for one or other political viewpoint for a generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 19 minutes ago, Chinahand said: Teapot - why the ad hominem - you've responded to Neil, there's really no need to add agro. Neil - surely your aware of the US's very poor record of Judicial equality? The causes of it are very complex, but my understanding is that even after adjusting for things like poverty, lack of education, etc US Blacks are treated considerably worse than Whites. I don’t disagree China. You posted evidential back up which was all I was after. Google is only your friend if you put in the correct search criteria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 30 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: What's the point? You are utterly incapable of having a reasoned debate. Just for you though here is a link https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/us-prisoners-sentences-life-non-violent-crimes I can't really be bothered following it up. That does not back up your claim that they have been locked up for being black and poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Colombe Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 27 minutes ago, Chinahand said: there's really no need to add agro. There's no need, but there's plenty of value in so doing. If you can be bothered. I can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted September 17, 2018 Author Share Posted September 17, 2018 5 minutes ago, John Wright said: It’s not really the probity or otherwise of judicial nominees it’s the total corruption, in the case of the senate, of the politicised appointment process, where the question of ability to be a judge and apply the law without fear or favour is now secondary to “fixing” the court to impose a majority for one or other political viewpoint for a generation. It is fascinating how modes of Judicial Interpretation have become a polarised political issue. I'm not quite sure why texturalism or original meaning have become republican shibboleths - other than due to the inherent conservatism (small c) in looking at a document that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 15 minutes ago, Neil Down said: That does not back up your claim that they have been locked up for being black and poor. It's this kind of nonsense that provokes the aggro. Johns point about the politicization of the whole process is a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.