SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tejek who wrote (242689)7/24/2005 9:13:45 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 1576576
 
If you object, then the burden of proof lies with you.

Nonsense. That would basically mean the first statement made by anyone is assumed to be true by default. What a silly idea. If the statement is solidly backed, than the burden of either showing its backing to be faulty, or providing equal backing for alternate ideas would fall on me, but if it is just asserted, I can just assert that it is wrong.

Eric has provided factual evidence that the ratio is 80/20 in favor of the men. The current ratio on the court is 90/10.

Considering the small size of the court the discrepancy between 80/20 and 90/10 is minor. You simply will not have every group, or even every group large enough to be 1/9th of the pool, represented equally at all times, and the attempt to do so will have to be at the expense of just looking for the best judge.


Regarding one of your other criteria, Roberts is hardly a senior judge. He's been a federal judge for only two years. Since that is the case, almost anyone of the federal judges would have been eligible, including all the women made judges since 1997.


He has been a senior federal judge, and he is one of the most experienced and effective litigators in terms of cases in front of the supreme court.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext