I thought Matthew Yglesias had a nice post recently defending the idea that we should activly seek to diversify the Supreme Court. He makes the point that achieving diversity is "not an alternative to caring about the quality of the jurisprudence, it’s part of trying to get good jurisprudence."
I like this take, because in my opinion diversity is important as to the judiciary not because judges are supposed to represent the interests of the people (that's really more for the legislative and executive branches) but because the judiciary is supposed to interpret law and resolve disputes --- and "[i]t’s absurd to think that a forum of nine white, male, heterosexual Christians could possibly compose the best possible forum" for this.
I like this take, because in my opinion diversity is important as to the judiciary not because judges are supposed to represent the interests of the people (that's really more for the legislative and executive branches) but because the judiciary is supposed to interpret law and resolve disputes --- and "[i]t’s absurd to think that a forum of nine white, male, heterosexual Christians could possibly compose the best possible forum" for this.
No comments:
Post a Comment