Biden’s shortlist for the Supreme Court vacancy | USA TODAY

President Biden will honor a campaign pledge to name the first Black woman to the Supreme Court this year.
RELATED:

"The person I will nominate will be someone with extraordinary qualifications, character, experience and integrity," Biden said. "And that person will be the first Black woman ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court. It's long overdue in my view."

» Subscribe to USA TODAY:
» Watch more on this and other topics from USA TODAY:
» USA TODAY delivers current local and national news, sports, entertainment, finance, technology, and more through award-winning journalism, photos, videos and VR.

79 comments

  1. I’m all for diversity but nobody is going to mention Brandon doing the racist thing of picking a justice based soley on race.

    1. @Rick That’s why I included the “Latinos who identify as white” there, which puts it back over 80%. “Hispanic” isn’t a race on the census. A Latino can chose white or non-white. As of the 2020 census, over 20% of Latinos identified as white.

    2. @originaldelta I LIVE IN COMMIEFORNIA, WHERE YOU PEOPLE GET TO SELF IDENTIFY AS “WHATEVER”…WHERE LINES ARE BLURRED!!! WHERE POLICE ARE THROWN UNDER THE BUS AND CRIMINALS ARE PRAISED!!! YOU PEOPLE ARE INSANE!!!

    3. @originaldelta DEMOCRATS ARE VERY “UNBECOMING” OF A HUMAN BEING. IT’S A SAD DAY WHEN A DEMOCRAT GOVERNOR ADMITS HIS STATE LOOKS LIKE VENEZUELA. YOU PEOPLE ARE EXPERTS ON “UNBECOMING” BEHAVIOR, HISTORICALLY!!!!

    1. @David Huberty Sure, come to Denver Colorado. We have a lot of hiking trails with steep cliffs I could show you. I swear, it will be just an accident

    2. @Biden Vaxxx’d Ur Mom I am not going to bow before you while you sit here with such open hate of White people.
      You will get what you deserve, I suspect you already have.

    3. @David Huberty open hate of white ppl? What? How so? You made a claim now back it up, how am I hateful towards white ppl? Explain?

    4. @David Huberty also I never asked you to bow in front of me, what is wrong with you? Cam you not admit when you were wrong? Have you ever admitted you were wrong?

      You sound like an old man yelling at the clouds.

    5. @Biden Vaxxx’d Ur Mom I have not been wrong about anything. You are the one that mindlessly repeats falsehood due to your mindless hate.

  2. I would be very embarrassed if I were a black judge and knew I was only appointed for my color. There would always be that asterisk next to my name. I would want to be appointed solely for my skills and talents as a judge and my strict adherence to the law and the Constitution of the United States AS IT IS WRITTEN.

    1. @Julian Sutton That’s not at all what affirmative action is. Affirmative action, as spelled out explicitly, is under the premise that there are qualified people of every race and gender, and that it’s the obligation of the person hiring to find qualified people of other races and genders and consider them.

    2. @Miguel Martin Not for me. I’ve researched these women, besides what they laid out in the video. Any of them would make me very pleased. They have excellent experience and education.

    3. @Julian Sutton Bush didn’t have to come out and say, I’m going to be picking a black man to SCOTUS because everyone already knew it. Everyone except you, apparently. Clueless much?

    4. There was a time when black excellence was obvious at work. Now it’s just black and what does massa say for me to say?

  3. Just to quote something “The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Provisions of this civil rights act forbade discrimination on the basis of sex, as well as, race in hiring, promoting, and firing.”

    1. @Reclaimer 117 You know nothing about MLK. Try reading or listening to some of his speeches besides I Have a Dream.

    2. @Marci LK rac·ism (rā′sĭz′əm)
      n.
      1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
      2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

      Using skin color to pick a justice fits 1 and 2 above.

      Oh so I Have a Dream has an asterisk. Good to know.

      Please stop defending racist policy.

    3. @Marci LK Point being? I’m not suggesting they aren’t qualified for some position, and I’m assuming (maybe naively) that they were put in their current positions because they were chosen on their merits alone, not race and/or gender. But to be considered for a position based in any part on race and gender is discriminatory… and it would send a great message if the Senate denied the nomination based on that fact.

  4. If I’m a black woman nominated by Biden for the supreme court I’m turning it down. Why would anyone want to be Biden’s diversity pick. That’s all she’ll ever be known for.

    1. So you’re saying the woman who took AG Garland’s former position shouldn’t be proud of being nominated, even though Obama nominated Garland when he was in the exact same job? It was ok for Garland to take it, but when a black woman occupies the same spot, she should turn it down?

  5. This is so wrong in so many levels that it is incomprehensible. If this what he wanted to do from the beginning, make a list and then pick a black woman; this way no one would have known his intentions. But then this is Joe. I hate to feel like a token (there I said it).

  6. He’s literally discriminating against everyone else by only selecting a black women. You can’t promote or hire because of race

    1. @David Huberty I’m sure you’d have a problem with anybody of any color or sex that Biden would pick but given the chance to show your racism, well here we are.

    2. @FierceFeline Your overt hate of White people is noted and no it is not fine. You will get what you deserve.

    3. @David Huberty Your overt idiocy is noted. Some of my best friends are white and there are already plenty of whites on the court. The court deserves to represent more of America than that however.

    4. For your stupid democrats in these comments. Allllll they had to do is have a pool of people on list then pick the African American women and not make a big deal about it. Not that hard. When your purposely saying it cause you need the minority vote in midterms. It’s embarrassing.

    5. @Salty Navy Trump had no such list, picked all white males who are all well represented, like Rapey McBeerface. You are ignorant and embarrassing. Losers aren’t choosers. Biden gets his choice.

    1. @Daniel L Yeah, religious fanatics are hilarious. How many times do the JW’s have to be wrong about the end of the world before they realize that there is no God that’s going to save them?

    2. @I love irony well if you were smart then you’d take into account that someone had to write it bc books don’t write themselves either.

    3. @I love irony saying something doesn’t mean speaking either, speaking is vocal while saying something can be through text or other options such as sign language if you want to get technical.

  7. Applicant : Am I qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice, the highest court in our land?
    Biden: Are you black?
    Applicant: Yes.
    Biden : Are you female?
    Applicant: Yes.
    Biden : You’re qualified!! But, did you vote for me for president?
    Applicant: Sorry, I didn’t…
    Biden: You ain’t black!!!

    1. @Ryooken An actual racist calling me a racist beacuse I hate discrimination based on race. What a funny world I’m living in. Well to answer your question I don’t object the people you mentioned in the Supreme Court because I look into the background and history of each judge and I determined that they are are fit to be in that position. the Race and the gender are not my concern. it is their merit is what important to me.

    2. @Ryooken That just makes you an idiot, because people fighting against affirmative action don’t want people to be discriminated AGAINST or FOR for the color of their skin.

      I take you back to our earlier discussion about California, and how the most liberal state in the country has soundly rejected affirmative action NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE. Once in 1996 with Prop 209, and then again in 2020 with Prop 16, which was rejected by an even larger margin than Prop 209 passed by.

      Are you going to say California is a racist state?

    3. @Ryooken Trump won because he’s white. On the heels of a 2-term black president.

      You seriously can’t make this up.

    4. @Ryooken About 5 minutes of Googling revealed something interesting.

      Peter J. Phipps: A man born to Indian immigrant parents. He was on Trump’s short list for Supreme Court nominees. He was elevated to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals.

      Martha M.Pacold: An Asian woman who was on Trump’s short list for Supreme Court Justice and who was elevated to US District Court for IL, becoming the first Asian-American woman to do so. In an overwhelmingly blue state. And she was appointed by Trump.. Let that sink in.

      Daniel Cameron: A BLACK MAN who was on Trump’s short list for Supreme Court judge. He was endorsed by Trump in his 2019 Primary, which he won BY OVER 10 POINTS. IN KY. A BLACK MAN. UNSEATED A WHITE MAN. IN KY. He then defeated a Democrat nominee with 58% of the vote in the general election.

      I MEAN, WOW! A BLACK CANDIDATE FROM TRUMP! The very thing you said DIDN’T EXIST. YOu even called it a “fact”!

      So much for your facts.

  8. “Shortlist” – because it falls short of a list of most qualified, as it is effectively a discriminatory list based on race and gender.

  9. The 1864 Civil Rights Act was intended to end discrimination in employment based on race and gender but, apparently Biden can do whatever he wants. If he can openly discriminate and make his decision based on race and gender, then why can’t everybody else hire employees the same way?

    1. @Rocket Man You cant undermine the spirit of the law if the law is not applicable to the act. Your failure to recognize situational context amounts to little more than useless virtue signaling. An analogy if you will, if you buy pot legally in California are you undermining all the anti-drug purchase and distribution laws in states where it’s not legal? The answer is obviously no. Context matters. As Title 7 has absolutely no bearing on the matter it is irrelevant.

    2. @Un Known I think you’re fixated on an unduly restrictive meaning of the word “undermine.” If one state has a law that permits something that a neighboring state prohibits, then the permissive state is undermining the restrictive one. For instance, there are dry counties that don’t permit the sale of liquor but the people who want liquor just drive to a county that permits the sale and undermine (not violate) the laws in their own state. If I tell my employees that they can’t smoke because it’s offensive to others but smoke in front of them because I’m the boss and I can do whatever I want, then I have undermined my own policy by setting the opposite example of the one I want them to follow.

    3. @Rocket Man Your comparison is not analogous. In your hypothetical a) the individual who implemented the restriction is not following them b) the assumption is that all individuals whithin that business are encompassed by the restrictions. The president neither made the restrictions nor does Title 7 legally apply to the appointment process. It therefore does not erode the law or the laws spirit. By your framework, if an employee chose to smoke on their own time at thier own home, they would be undermining the restrictions. This is obviously a ridiculous notion.

      The dry county comparison is inane as well. Within in the jurisdiction the restrictions still stand. The next counties law have not eroded the standard or enforcement of these restrictions within the original county’s jurisdiction. This is a great representation of the situational context I mentioned earlier though. You wouldn’t apply the original county’s restrictions to individuals in the next county as that county had no restrictions would you?

      All your doing here is virtue signaling on the basis of personal bias and a glaring misunderstanding of laws and what it means to undermine them.

    4. @Un Known Obviously, extending a restriction on smoking at work to smoking at home is a ridiculous notion but then you made the illogical extension not me. You think I’m virtue signaling and unable to follow your hyper technical line of thought. I think your position is both foolish and tone deaf. We can agree to disagree because there’s no point in discussing this further.

    5. @Rocket Man By your own logical, or in this case illogical framework, the employee smoking at home would be undermining the work place restrictions. You have literally given no acknowledgement to the idea of context in regards to application of laws. By your logic someone drinking a beer in the US undermines the Saudi Arabian anti-alcohol laws. There is a remote, tangential connection as they both involve alcohol and because you either don’t understand or don’t care about context, it means the individual is eroding the power of Saudi laws. It’s honestly a wholly ridiculous position you are taking. Blinded by bias and nothing more. Good luck with that.

  10. Kind of a bummer for all of the females of all colors but one, and all males of every color. I wonder how the qualified asian women or black men feel?

    We’ve reached the point where genitalia and melanin are pre requisites of qualification and it’s not viewed as discriminatory.

    1. Yes we have reached the point where the system White people created now openly works against White people.
      It needs to be completely destroyed.

  11. So much for judging a person by the color of there skin. Big media going right along , nobody questioning Biden on this !

  12. Hey Joe you picked a woman of color as your VP and we all see how that’s working out for you – I don’t care what color or gender a person is as long as they have the qualifications for the job and in this case defend the Constitution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.