Emily
MikeI saw a very disappointing poll today. ABC News and the Washington Post asked people what “factors” they would consider if they personally were to choose a Supreme Court nominee to replace Justice Stevens.
As you can see, only 16% said that being an African American would be a “factor in favor.” Only 15% said that being a woman would be a “factor in favor.” And only 4% said that being a gay or lesbian would be a factor in favor.” For me, any of those “factors” would be a positive. In fact, I have written before that President Obama should nominate a woman to replace Justice Stevens so that the current two out of nine woman can at least get to a more equitable three out of the nine. But, apparently, the people who were polled do not agree with me. Let’s hope that Obama does.
The poll also shows that, at least, people don’t hold being a woman or African American against a potential nominee. But look at the “factor against” gays and lesbians. 25 percent would hold that against a potential nominee. That’s horrible, but I suppose the percent would have been much higher only a few years ago. (As a side note, since I am an atheist, it would have been interesting to see what the “factor against” would be for an atheist. As has been written many times before, an atheist has less chance than any other group of being elected to public office.)
And, although not shown in the diagram above, here are some other results of the poll. I find these to be mind-blowing and make me wonder in what world the people who were polled have been living.
- 26% consider the Supreme Court too liberal, compared to 21% who say it is too conservative. This is even worse than three years ago, when 18% thought the court was too liberal and 31% thought it was too conservative. Those figures are unbelievable.
- For more evidence that Republicans are deluding themselves, in 2007, 26% of Republicans thatought the court’s rulings were too liberal. That figure in today’s poll is 43%.
- And for the kicker, in the 2007 poll, 43% of Democrats thought the court was too conservative. In today’s poll, that figure has dropped so that only 35% of Democrats today think the court is too conservative.
About the only decent result I can see from the poll is that 65% said they feel “comfortable” with Barack Obama choosing the Supreme Court nominee. That doesn’t sound all that high, but it is at least higher than the 54% in a 2005 poll who said they felt comfortable with George Bush choosing a nominee.
Filed under: GLBT, Law, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Religion Tagged: | ABC News, Barack Obama, Justice Stevens, Poll, Supreme Court, Washington Post
I propose an amendment to the United States Constitution that would guarantee Gender Equality on the U.S. Supreme Court. Please read:
http://supreme-court-gender-equality-pac.blogspot.com/
Also, I propose that U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein should replace Justice John Paul Stevens as the next U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice. Please read:
http://steven-a-sylwester.blogspot.com/2009/10/dianne-feinstein-should-be-next-us.html
Steven A. Sylwester
Very interesting blogs. Thanks for the links.
I certainly believe some people are against gays and lesbians and that there are a lot of folks who don’t think diversity matters.
Nevertheless, looking at the poll options, I think drawing the conclusion “few care about diversity in the supreme court” is a bit premature.
I care very much about diversity in the supreme court, but give those poll options with the way the question is phrased, I also would have voted those as not a factor. It is a badly constructed poll.
I don’t think people should be selected as supreme court judges because they are women or because they are Black. I do think the supreme court should be diverse, though, and to some measure reflect the gender and ethnic background make-up of American society.
So as the supreme court stands right now, it’s a bit male-heavy and could do with more females. But that is as it stands right now.
Polls that are badly phrased are hard to draw definite conclusions from.
I’m not sure why you say that the poll is badly phrased. The “factor” questions seem pretty clear to me. I know I would have answered the questions on women, African Americans, gays and lesbians as “factor in favor.” (Although I will say that I don’t understand the “*” for the question that says “Each item asked of half of the respondents.”)
I don’t think that a person should be selected solely because of any of those factors. But I think it’s proper (and desirable) to use the “factors” in making a decision. Although it’s impossible to state an across-the-board application of affirmative action in the U.S. and its states, considerations such as these are often allowable to get to a desired point of diversity.