Politics, News & Issues >
US Law & Justice (Other)
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould gender be a determining factor in choosing a Supreme Court nominee?
Results so far:
| Yes | 16% | 25 votes | Total: 156 votes | |
| No | 84% | 131 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesTo be a Supreme Court Justice, requires someone capable of handling an enormous responsibility. Whoever serves, serves for life. The appointment of a new Supreme Court Justice is carefully vetted for this reason. Both major political parties desire, at a minimum, that the balance of conservative and liberal Judges be equal. They hope that the scales can be tipped in their favor by having the majority of Judges holding their views on the laws. Most people believe that the vetting process is all about left or right leaning tendencies on interpreting the laws. There is another issue that must be consider because, unfortunately, it is a factor in how a Justice might vote. Gender does matter when a Supreme Court Justice votes on a rule of law.
Gender does play a part in how an individual views the world in general. We know that there is a discernable difference in the perspective of men and women. Although we would hope that those serving on the Supreme Court would put aside their personal feelings when interpreting the law, we know this is not the case. In fact, this became apparent to me for the first time through news accounts of the current female nominee's, MS Sotomayor, comments regarding the fact that she was female and a Latino. Prior to this, I had believed that Justices voted according to their interpretation of the Constitution of the United States of America. If personal beliefs are to be a factor in how they vote, then gender becomes a very important issue.
I now believe gender matters, simply because there should be a balance of males and females serving on the Supreme Court. I find it sad that our laws must be constantly interpreted by any group of people. I find the laws, as stated in the Constitution, are without ambiguity, needing no further interpretation. If we, as citizens of the United States, feel that our laws are unclear and in need of clarification, we should revise the constitution, making sure no law is open to different interpretations. The revised Constitution could then be voted on by all those registered to vote.
When considering the legality of abortion, homosexual marriages, rights afforded to individuals based on their sexual preferences and rights that Christians are losing, how a male would feel about these issues could be vastly different from a female point of view. Of course, each of us is looking for someone to represent our own views on these issues and more. It is evident that all people will not be represented in our Supreme Court system. With so many factors to be considered, i.e., personal feelings on laws concerning life and death issues, religion, adoption and penal laws; we can only hope that there will be someone serving, who will fight for true justice for all.
Learn more about this author, Barbara Stanley.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
The fact that this question has been posed shows that the bias against intelligent and educated females is still around. It poses another question. What is it that people fear about a successful woman taking an important office? Gender has nothing to do with the ability to do the job.
What matters in a Supreme Court nominee is their experience, skill, humanity and ability to interpret the law. The gender of an individual is not going to influence their ability to think and solve problems. Both men and women are capable of being professional in this capacity so this should not be an issue.
There are confused ideas about gender in the population at large. Traditional ideas of male and female roles has set minds to think that only men can do some jobs and only women others. How many frustrated women are there because they are expected to be housewives and that is not their most productive form of work.
How many men are there struggling to earn enough to keep a family which his wife could do better. It is the ability of the individual which counts. There are female engineers and male nurses. Both cross the lines of traditional jobs.
However women are handicapped by their biology. If a woman wants to marry and have a family, she does not have a house husband to run things in the background, usually, as many men have. The act of producing a child is time consuming and exhausting. This break from the employment that is recognized as work by society should not mitigate against her.
Once this stage of her life is over and the children are nearly grown, a woman is free to follow her career choice. While she may have missed some career experience, the experience gained by running a family has given her a depth of understanding of humanity which cannot be gained any other way. It also gives staying power.
Nominees for positions like the Supreme Court need to be competent individuals. The training for lawyers requires them to be able to search past cases and to be able to find precedents. To a layman the law appears to be flexible in interpretation. It seems the most useful capacity a nominee has is the capacity to think outside the box. Both genders can do this equally well.
Gender determines ones biological phenotype, the sex one presents to the world and it might predispose an individual towards certain interests. For some cases a strong stomach is more important than gender.
Gender is no more relevant to the capacity of a nominee for the Supreme Court than any other job.
Learn more about this author, Rosemary Redfern.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- US Law & Justice (Other)
- Should US attorney Johnny Sutton be forced to testify in the case of Ramos and Compean?
- Are insider trading laws really needed?
- Do hate crime laws prevent hatred in America?
- Should the US Senate retain "confirm and consent" powers over high court nominations?
- Is the United States becoming a police state?
- Should there be a federal law against prostitution?
