By nominating Janice Rogers Brown, Biden could right a wrong at the same time he fulfils his promise to nominate a Black woman. Biden twice filibustered her nomination to be the first Black woman on the DC Court of Appeals.
I am a former Chairman of the Tidewater Libertarian Party and was the 2007 LP candidate for the 14th district VA Senate. Previously, I was the Volunteer State Director for the FairTax. I am married 50 years with two grown children and 5 grandchildren.
View all posts by Don Tabor
Published
16 thoughts on “A Nominee for Biden’s SCOTUS pick would right a wrong”
Don’t hold your breath.
I think there are some very well-qualified black women without a lifelong record of right-wing activism.
Josh Hawley giving advice on what Biden must do to unite the country? Now that’s a hoot. One of the scummiest little Trump wannabes out there. Just ask his mentor. . .
“Activist” is an undefined term. So, let’s leave it at that. I still suggest you not hold your breath.
Marc Thiesen, a right-wing columnist published by WAPO, wrote a piece Tuesday excoriating President Biden for opposing her past nominations. Amidst his cries of Hypocrisy! was this statement. . .
“But she was an outspoken conservative — so Biden set out to destroy her.”
Think about that, according to this “conservative,” Biden should have ignored her work and philosophy and supported her because she is black woman with a great back story. I guess he does not understand that affirmative action is only supposed to kick in when everything else is equal.
Let me add that Judge Brown made herself a lightning rod with controversial dissents as summarized in this 2005 letter drafted by a leading civil and human rights organization. Biden was not alone in voting against her nomination, so too did Senator Barack Obama.
As I said, “activist” is an undefined term. You can call her whatever you want and so will I. In any case, she is not going to be on the Supreme Court.
One decision I consider “activist” was her ruling on the Affordable Care Act where she found requiring health insurance to provide contraceptives “trammels freedom of religion”. That is nonsense. Nobody was going to be forced to use contraception if they did not want it. Insurance must include coverage of drawing and giving blood as needed. Is that a violation of religious freedom because some religions forbid it? We are a secular society. She totally fails to understand that. IMHO.
RE: “Biden twice filibustered her nomination to be the first Black woman on the DC Court of Appeals.”
Apparently, skin color and sex don’t mean as much to Stumble Joe as he promised during the 2020 campaign. It’s hard to make sense of first opposing a black woman, then claiming that only a black woman will do.
Oh well, let the man nominate Kamala Harris to SCOTUS. We wouldn’t be rid of her, but we’d be rid of 8/9ths of her were she confirmed.
1) Garland should have been given the hearing he was nominated for. But because Magic Mitch waved his turtle shell wand, he decided that it was too close to an election.
2) By the same standard Barrett should NOT have been nominated because … wait for it … IT WAS TOO CLOSE TO AN ELECTION.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Don’t hold your breath.
I think there are some very well-qualified black women without a lifelong record of right-wing activism.
Josh Hawley giving advice on what Biden must do to unite the country? Now that’s a hoot. One of the scummiest little Trump wannabes out there. Just ask his mentor. . .
https://theweek.com/speedreads/959666/josh-hawleys-mentor-regrets-supporting-calling-worst-mistake-ever-made
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ad Hominem by association?
Brown is not an activist of any kind,
She is a strict constructionist. That is by definition not activist.
LikeLike
“Activist” is an undefined term. So, let’s leave it at that. I still suggest you not hold your breath.
Marc Thiesen, a right-wing columnist published by WAPO, wrote a piece Tuesday excoriating President Biden for opposing her past nominations. Amidst his cries of Hypocrisy! was this statement. . .
“But she was an outspoken conservative — so Biden set out to destroy her.”
Think about that, according to this “conservative,” Biden should have ignored her work and philosophy and supported her because she is black woman with a great back story. I guess he does not understand that affirmative action is only supposed to kick in when everything else is equal.
Let me add that Judge Brown made herself a lightning rod with controversial dissents as summarized in this 2005 letter drafted by a leading civil and human rights organization. Biden was not alone in voting against her nomination, so too did Senator Barack Obama.
https://civilrights.org/resource/oppose-the-confirmation-of-janice-rogers-brown/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Those dissents pretty much show she is the opposite of activist.
LikeLike
As I said, “activist” is an undefined term. You can call her whatever you want and so will I. In any case, she is not going to be on the Supreme Court.
One decision I consider “activist” was her ruling on the Affordable Care Act where she found requiring health insurance to provide contraceptives “trammels freedom of religion”. That is nonsense. Nobody was going to be forced to use contraception if they did not want it. Insurance must include coverage of drawing and giving blood as needed. Is that a violation of religious freedom because some religions forbid it? We are a secular society. She totally fails to understand that. IMHO.
LikeLike
“She is a strict constructionist. That is by definition not activist.”
That would be a Libertarian definition. In the real world she is a right wing activist judge. -IMO
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Biden twice filibustered her nomination to be the first Black woman on the DC Court of Appeals.”
Apparently, skin color and sex don’t mean as much to Stumble Joe as he promised during the 2020 campaign. It’s hard to make sense of first opposing a black woman, then claiming that only a black woman will do.
Oh well, let the man nominate Kamala Harris to SCOTUS. We wouldn’t be rid of her, but we’d be rid of 8/9ths of her were she confirmed.
LikeLike
“It’s hard to make sense of first opposing a black woman, then claiming that only a black woman will do.”
It is not hard to make sense of at all. You need to try a little harder.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Whoopi Goldberg, then.
LikeLike
Nope. Try again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If he really wanted to right a wrong, he’d nominate Anita Hill.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I also believe there’s a non-zero chance he nominates Michelle Obama. That would probably be the funniest possible outcome.
LikeLike
She might be too busy:
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/592505-michelle-obama-democrats-2024-break-glass-in-case-of-emergency-candidate
LikeLiked by 1 person
They’ll try everything except some very mild social democracy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Any judge NOT recommended by The Heritage Foundation.
https://theweek.com/political-satire/1009658/how-offensive
LikeLiked by 1 person
There are two wrongs that need to be righted.
1) Garland should have been given the hearing he was nominated for. But because Magic Mitch waved his turtle shell wand, he decided that it was too close to an election.
2) By the same standard Barrett should NOT have been nominated because … wait for it … IT WAS TOO CLOSE TO AN ELECTION.
LikeLiked by 1 person