Still, I'm doing my best to rise above my former cynicism about all things political, and so I'm trying to learn a little, at least, about this new member of the highest court in the U.S.A.
The main controversy I've heard about concerns some statements she made in a 2001 speech at UC Berkeley:
Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. ... I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.
Some consider this a sign of bias, or even of "reverse racism". But, in the context of discussing cases on sexual and/or racial discrimination, her point seems to be that her experience as a minority and/or as a woman gives her relevant information that a typical white man would not have.
My hope is that she will bring such a perspective without bringing prejudice. I hope that she will consider the Supreme Court as a place to settle disputes based on law, rather than a place to create new law. And I hope that she is as open to other perspectives, such as the perspective offered by her Catholic faith, as she expects people to be open to hers.
No comments:
Post a Comment