But you can also see that pool of 7% containing top tier candidates ignored for the longest time - it's like a tree that nobody wanted the fruits of for the stupidest reason.
Statistically closer to 2%.
I am all for having a female black supreme court justice, if they're the top candidate. But, it has to begin with better representation at the grassroots level first.
It is admittedly higher at Ivy law league schools it is 0.73*11 = 8%, but these are representative of the sub-25 yr old population which isn't being considered for the role.
With 1/9 being 11%, having 1 black person on the supreme court would be the closest to accurate representation. From the perspective of equity, black people are not underrepresented in the supreme court.
Yeah, I have no dog in this fight.
I was merely pointing out, that the case for diversity as championed by Biden (or his cabinet/loudest supporters) contradicts his choice to push for a candidate that would lead to over-representation of a certain community in the Supreme Court.
The fact we've had 7% black women for decades and never had a single one as a supreme court judge is something Democrats obviously care to change. They'd like judges to have diverse views and life experiences, reflective of the diversity of the electorate, not just more white Christian conservatives.
My point is that I don't want Donald Trump to set the bar on what is right and appropriate conduct for an American president. I don't think citing Trump's many shortcomings makes it okay for Biden to do dumb things like automatically ruling out 93% of the population on the basis of race and gender.
And pragmatically, this is politics, sides with teams exist in politics, different groups exist, representation matters. Would it be smart for the Dems to not please their supporters who elected them? Keep in mind, Biden beat Bernie in the primary largely due to huge wins with black democrats in the South.
Instead, he and all the rest are viewing it positively: ruling in the 7% of the 300+ million are black women, That's 21 million never considered before, always ruled out by racists and sexists in history.
What's the problem with giving representation to a minority? How is it different from literally every pick, which is based on politics? Politics tends to dictate everything in politics, surprise surprise.
As much as purists and idealogues like yourself want quality only, you'll never define a pure and quality pick in the USA when there are 2 teams with vastly different views of quality. I guarantee you could never name a single judge who both sides would choose. Obama tried, his name was Merrick Garland, and that pick was stolen by McConnell, and Trump used it to foist a hardcore conservative on us instead of Obama's centrist moderate pick.
You're complaining about a black woman being chosen when the last democratic pick was literally stolen by the party which represents the minority in electoral and popular terms.