A Tad Unfair

I would hate someone to scour all my writing for evidence of mediocrity. They would find plenty. Then again, I'm a hollywood assistant and not a nominee to the Supreme Court.

But the real issue, again, is this:

To be sure, Sotomayor’s hackneyed identity politics, so ably skewered by other NR writers, is the most troubling part of her speech. In denouncing the lack of adequate Hispanic representation on the federal bench, she uses the crudest possible test for alleged discrimination against Hispanics. The numbers of Latino judges “are grossly below our proportion of the population,” she writes, seemingly oblivious to the fact that the relevant benchmark for judicial representation is — at a bare minimum — the proportion of Hispanics among law-school graduates. (The real benchmark, of course, should be the proportion of Hispanics graduating at the top of their class.) The lack of proportional Hispanic representation on the bench — defined by population numbers — Sotomayor writes, demonstrates the “real and continuing need” for ethnic-based advocacy groups to pressure the Senate for “equality in the justice system.” Such a deliberately blind understanding of hiring and qualifications bodes very poorly for future Supreme Court precedent on matters of race.

Like I said, I'd prefer process for nominating a Supreme Justice to be about a consideration of the best legal minds and a solid examination of character, as opposed to casting it like a Bennaton billboard.