ADVERTISEMENT

Joe Biden's historic diversity in federal judges continues.

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
115,228
167,792
113
150 judges confirmed by the Senate, 100 are women. That is double the number of women for Trump's entire presidency. More black women than all other administrations combined. More Latinas than the previous three administrations combined. More judges with experience with civili rights or as public defenders. And, no judges deemed "unqualified", a break from the Trump Administration which placed eight judges into lifetime jobs who were deemed unqualified.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-150-judges-women_n_654a7921e4b0e3ecaf8b30a3
 
I love watching videos of the Senate confirmation process, and Senator John Kennedy's basic bar exam questions for nominees. It's really telling how many nominees can't answer basic questions like the difference between a 'stay' and 'TRO'. It's also really telling that the Administration doesn't better prep their nominees for John Kennedy because his questioning doesn't change much. I guess the Administration just expects a rubber stamp no matter how unprepared or unqualified their nominees might be.

For the record, I've made similar comments about nominations of other administrations in the past. It's really just embarrassing sometimes.
 
Gender and color are the best indicators of qualification. Always has been.
I don't believe you will find anywhere that unqualified people have been placed into judgeships. Biden is appointing judges that look like America. Diverse. It will be healthier for our nation to have different voices and different life experiences on the court. Putting people on the courts with experience as defense lawyers and as civil rights lawyers isn't a bad thing.
Over 70 percent of Trump’s judges were white men. Are they naturally more qualified?
 
Last edited:
I don't believe you will find anywhere that unqualified people have been placed into judgeships. Biden is appointing judges that look like America. Diverse. It will be healthier for our nation to have different voices and different life experiences on the court. Putting people on the courts with experience as defense lawyers and as civil rights lawyers isn't a bad thing.
Over 70 percent of Trump’s judges were white men. Are they naturally more qualified?
Lucas, really. All you have to do is watch the confirmation hearings. It's laughable, but also frightening sometimes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ICHerky
I don't believe you will find anywhere that unqualified people have been placed into judgeships. Biden is appointing judges that look like America. Diverse. It will be healthier for our nation to have different voices and different life experiences on the court. Putting people on the courts with experience as defense lawyers and as civil rights lawyers isn't a bad thing.
Over 70 percent of Trump’s judges were white men. Are they naturally more qualified?
I would say based upon the population of lawyers (almost all federal judges are lawyers), it seems to me that the Biden administration is trying REALLY hard to diversify the bench for the sole reason of diversity, just like every other part of his administration and NOT the quality of the candidate as has been presented to you already with the confirmation hearings. Libtards being "proud" of this is why this country is ruined. The law should be gender and color blind, but libtards are obsessed with putting people in groups so they can pit people against one another.

Also why do you specifically talk about black people when it's clear that the Asian population has made the most difference in diversity of legal minds? Because you're a libtard.

Lawyers by Race and Ethnicity
The number of Asian American, Hispanic and mixed-race lawyers reported in the ABA National Lawyer Population Survey grew substantially in the past decade.

Note: About half of all state bars and licensing agencies track race and ethnicity in the profession. In 2022, 26 states reported the race and ethnicity of lawyers.​

White people are still overrepresented in the legal profession compared with their presence in the U.S. population, but that is slowly changing. Ten years ago, in 2012, lawyers of color were 12% of the profession. A decade later, in 2022, they were 19% of the profession.

The biggest change was in the number of Asian American lawyers. Last year, in 2021, the National Lawyer Population Survey found 2.5% of all lawyers were Asian American. That number more than doubled in 2022 to 5.5%. The change occurred largely because California began reporting the race and ethnicity of its lawyers in 2022. California has a huge number of lawyers – 170,000 – and 13% of them are Asian American. Asian Americans are now represented in the legal profession very close to their share of the U.S. population (5.9%).

The percentage of Hispanic lawyers nationwide also rose – from 3.5% in 2012 to 5.8% a decade later in 2022, according to the survey. It rose a full percentage point in 2022 alone. Again, this was likely caused by California starting to count race and ethnicity among its lawyers. Still, Hispanics are underrepresented among lawyers compared with their share of the U.S. population (18.5%).

The number of mixed-race lawyers also grew. None were counted in 2014 and 2015, but by 2022 they were 2.7% of all lawyers. That’s almost identical to their share of the U.S. population (2.8%).

Meanwhile, the number of Black lawyers is virtually unchanged, according to the survey. Black lawyers were 4.7% of the profession in 2012 and 4.5% in 2022. That’s far less than the percentage of Black people in the U.S. population (13.4%).

Native Americans are the smallest racial or ethnic group among U.S. lawyers. One-half of 1% of all lawyers (0.5%) were Native American in 2022 – nearly unchanged from 0.6% a decade earlier. The U.S. population is 1.3% Native American.

Finally, the percentage of white lawyers has declined. White lawyers were 88.4% of the profession in 2012, but 81.0% in 2022. They are still overrepresented compared to the U.S. population. Non-Hispanic white people are 60.1% of the national population.



Sources: ABA National Lawyer Population Survey / U.S. Census Bureau

LawyerRaceEthnicity.png




LawyersByGender2022.png
 
I don't believe you will find anywhere that unqualified people have been placed into judgeships. Biden is appointing judges that look like America. Diverse. It will be healthier for our nation to have different voices and different life experiences on the court. Putting people on the courts with experience as defense lawyers and as civil rights lawyers isn't a bad thing.
Over 70 percent of Trump’s judges were white men. Are they naturally more qualified?
If you are appointing judges because they are black, or women or hispanic or men or white or tall or short, you are doing everyone a disservice. Americans deserve the best qualified hard working people running our judicial system not people who check a box and are qualified but would normally be down the list. I've always wondered why leftists think minorities are so unqualified, lazy or stupid that they have to give them special treatment so they can succeed.
 
150 judges confirmed by the Senate, 100 are women. That is double the number of women for Trump's entire presidency. More black women than all other administrations combined. More Latinas than the previous three administrations combined. More judges with experience with civili rights or as public defenders. And, no judges deemed "unqualified", a break from the Trump Administration which placed eight judges into lifetime jobs who were deemed unqualified.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-150-judges-women_n_654a7921e4b0e3ecaf8b30a3
1, 2, 3.....competent or not, here I come!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ICHerky
All judges should be straight, white, male, Catholic, former prosecutors, with military experience.

That uniformity greatly increases the likelihood that defendants will be treated the same, no matter where they are tried.
You left out competent. Was that by mistake or on purpose? There has been a rash of confirmation hearings lately where the appointee has been completely baffled by even the most basic questions pertaining to their field of expertise. Are you cool with that as long as the appointees are kool??
 
I love watching videos of the Senate confirmation process, and Senator John Kennedy's basic bar exam questions for nominees. It's really telling how many nominees can't answer basic questions like the difference between a 'stay' and 'TRO'. It's also really telling that the Administration doesn't better prep their nominees for John Kennedy because his questioning doesn't change much. I guess the Administration just expects a rubber stamp no matter how unprepared or unqualified their nominees might be.

For the record, I've made similar comments about nominations of other administrations in the past. It's really just embarrassing sometimes.
It's really cool when [he] will be directing the FAA and has no clue about how ATC works.
 
All judges should be straight, white, male, Catholic, former prosecutors, with military experience.

That uniformity greatly increases the likelihood that defendants will be treated the same, no matter where they are tried.
Nice sarcasm. The way to uniform treatment is understanding the law, and applying the law uniformly. In the case of federal judges, the Constitution and SCOTUS decisions need to be understood at an even higher level. There have been times where lawmakers have created disparity, like the difference in sentences for crack and cocaine.
 
Nice sarcasm. The way to uniform treatment is understanding the law, and applying the law uniformly. In the case of federal judges, the Constitution and SCOTUS decisions need to be understood at an even higher level. There have been times where lawmakers have created disparity, like the difference in sentences for crack and cocaine.
Because most cities in America were turned into Gaza over cocaine, Alex?
 
All judges should be straight, white, male, Catholic, former prosecutors, with military experience.

That uniformity greatly increases the likelihood that defendants will be treated the same, no matter where they are tried.
I guess you would prefer everyone is not treated equally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkeyeShawn
I would say based upon the population of lawyers (almost all federal judges are lawyers), it seems to me that the Biden administration is trying REALLY hard to diversify the bench for the sole reason of diversity, just like every other part of his administration and NOT the quality of the candidate as has been presented to you already with the confirmation hearings. Libtards being "proud" of this is why this country is ruined. The law should be gender and color blind, but libtards are obsessed with putting people in groups so they can pit people against one another.

Also why do you specifically talk about black people when it's clear that the Asian population has made the most difference in diversity of legal minds? Because you're a libtard.

Lawyers by Race and Ethnicity
The number of Asian American, Hispanic and mixed-race lawyers reported in the ABA National Lawyer Population Survey grew substantially in the past decade.

Note: About half of all state bars and licensing agencies track race and ethnicity in the profession. In 2022, 26 states reported the race and ethnicity of lawyers.​

White people are still overrepresented in the legal profession compared with their presence in the U.S. population, but that is slowly changing. Ten years ago, in 2012, lawyers of color were 12% of the profession. A decade later, in 2022, they were 19% of the profession.

The biggest change was in the number of Asian American lawyers. Last year, in 2021, the National Lawyer Population Survey found 2.5% of all lawyers were Asian American. That number more than doubled in 2022 to 5.5%. The change occurred largely because California began reporting the race and ethnicity of its lawyers in 2022. California has a huge number of lawyers – 170,000 – and 13% of them are Asian American. Asian Americans are now represented in the legal profession very close to their share of the U.S. population (5.9%).

The percentage of Hispanic lawyers nationwide also rose – from 3.5% in 2012 to 5.8% a decade later in 2022, according to the survey. It rose a full percentage point in 2022 alone. Again, this was likely caused by California starting to count race and ethnicity among its lawyers. Still, Hispanics are underrepresented among lawyers compared with their share of the U.S. population (18.5%).

The number of mixed-race lawyers also grew. None were counted in 2014 and 2015, but by 2022 they were 2.7% of all lawyers. That’s almost identical to their share of the U.S. population (2.8%).

Meanwhile, the number of Black lawyers is virtually unchanged, according to the survey. Black lawyers were 4.7% of the profession in 2012 and 4.5% in 2022. That’s far less than the percentage of Black people in the U.S. population (13.4%).

Native Americans are the smallest racial or ethnic group among U.S. lawyers. One-half of 1% of all lawyers (0.5%) were Native American in 2022 – nearly unchanged from 0.6% a decade earlier. The U.S. population is 1.3% Native American.

Finally, the percentage of white lawyers has declined. White lawyers were 88.4% of the profession in 2012, but 81.0% in 2022. They are still overrepresented compared to the U.S. population. Non-Hispanic white people are 60.1% of the national population.



Sources: ABA National Lawyer Population Survey / U.S. Census Bureau

LawyerRaceEthnicity.png




LawyersByGender2022.png

I find the second half of your post interesting - about the slowly changing demographics; is that being matched with corresponding changes changes in demographic background of judges?

I don’t totally love the emphasis on race that Biden and his administration has placed when nominating judges, but I get the approach. The judiciary in general has not been an especially diverse profession in American history, and my understanding is that it hasn’t changed as much as it probably should have.
 
I guess you would prefer everyone is not treated equally.
I'm one of the few people here who always argues for equality of treatment. Which is why, for example, I don't think women should have different (or no) abortion rights in different states.

What I'm arguing against is narrowness of thinking. And describing a narrowly selected Court was my way of mocking what's wrong now. As would be obvious to anyone who wasn't more interested in picking fights than solving problems.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: abby97
I find the second half of your post interesting - about the slowly changing demographics; is that being matched with corresponding changes changes in demographic background of judges?

I don’t totally love the emphasis on race that Biden and his administration has placed when nominating judges, but I get the approach. The judiciary in general has not been an especially diverse profession in American history, and my understanding is that it hasn’t changed as much as it probably should have.
I don't disagree with the premise that the legal area has been dominated by white folks for many years. We are definitely getting more folks outside of whites to become interested in this profession. That should come naturally, not artificially like Biden is doing by giving preference and reverse discrimination.
 
I don't disagree with the premise that the legal area has been dominated by white folks for many years. We are definitely getting more folks outside of whites to become interested in this profession. That should come naturally, not artificially like Biden is doing by giving preference and reverse discrimination.

Happening naturally is nice, but it’s also far too slow imo. We just have too many examples of other professions where the upper ranks get dominated by “the old boys club” so to speak where it becomes near-impossible to advance past a certain point unless you know the right people.

Biden giving preference to candidates of color I think is fine, it’s when that turns into reverse discrimination by stating for example that his SC pick would be a black woman that it becomes a problem.

Which is a shame, cuz I think KBJ was qualified in her own and was worthy of the nomination regardless of race or gender.
 
Hard to say, my guess is no. But artificially injecting a bunch of women of color into the system over night is not the answer. At the very least, it reeks of AA.
How did the officiating crew of the NCAAW championship work out by the way?
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT