Home
In this issue
April 9, 2014

Jonathan Tobin: Why Did Kerry Lie About Israeli Blame?

Samuel G. Freedman: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Jessica Ivins: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Kim Giles: Asking for help is not weakness

Kathy Kristof and Barbara Hoch Marcus: 7 Great Growth Israeli Stocks

Matthew Mientka: How Beans, Peas, And Chickpeas Cleanse Bad Cholesterol and Lowers Risk of Heart Disease

Sabrina Bachai: 5 At-Home Treatments For Headaches

The Kosher Gourmet by Daniel Neman Have yourself a matzo ball: The secrets bubby never told you and recipes she could have never imagined

April 8, 2014

Lori Nawyn: At Your Wit's End and Back: Finding Peace

Susan B. Garland and Rachel L. Sheedy: Strategies Married Couples Can Use to Boost Benefits

David Muhlbaum: Smart Tax Deductions Non-Itemizers Can Claim

Jill Weisenberger, M.S., R.D.N., C.D.E : Before You Lose Your Mental Edge

Dana Dovey: Coffee Drinkers Rejoice! Your Cup Of Joe Can Prevent Death From Liver Disease

Chris Weller: Electric 'Thinking Cap' Puts Your Brain Power Into High Gear

The Kosher Gourmet by Marlene Parrish A gift of hazelnuts keeps giving --- for a variety of nutty recipes: Entree, side, soup, dessert

April 4, 2014

Rabbi David Gutterman: The Word for Nothing Means Everything

Charles Krauthammer: Kerry's folly, Chapter 3

Amy Peterson: A life of love: How to build lasting relationships with your children

John Ericson: Older Women: Save Your Heart, Prevent Stroke Don't Drink Diet

John Ericson: Why 50 million Americans will still have spring allergies after taking meds

Cameron Huddleston: Best and Worst Buys of April 2014

Stacy Rapacon: Great Mutual Funds for Young Investors

Sarah Boesveld: Teacher keeps promise to mail thousands of former students letters written by their past selves

The Kosher Gourmet by Sharon Thompson Anyone can make a salad, you say. But can they make a great salad? (SECRETS, TESTED TECHNIQUES + 4 RECIPES, INCLUDING DRESSINGS)

April 2, 2014

Paul Greenberg: Death and joy in the spring

Dan Barry: Should South Carolina Jews be forced to maintain this chimney built by Germans serving the Nazis?

Mayra Bitsko: Save me! An alien took over my child's personality

Frank Clayton: Get happy: 20 scientifically proven happiness activities

Susan Scutti: It's Genetic! Obesity and the 'Carb Breakdown' Gene

Lecia Bushak: Why Hand Sanitizer May Actually Harm Your Health

Stacy Rapacon: Great Funds You Can Own for $500 or Less

Cameron Huddleston: 7 Ways to Save on Home Decor

The Kosher Gourmet by Steve Petusevsky Exploring ingredients as edible-stuffed containers (TWO RECIPES + TIPS & TECHINQUES)

Jewish World Review July 26, 2005 / 19 Tammuz, 5765

Washington's girl-crazy summer

By Kathryn Lopez


Printer Friendly Version
Email this article

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | The knee-jerk reaction some critics have had to John Roberts being selected as the president's first Supreme Court pick reeks of foolishness. This has been their thinking: A woman is retiring, and a woman must replace her. And so they just can't get that into a "John."

Even retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's first public reaction was: "He's good in every way, except he's not a woman." Perhaps President Bush should have nominated one of his twin daughters to the Supreme Court instead. Think that's silly? Then read the letter Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., sent to President Bush the morning after the Roberts announcement:

The freshman senator wrote, "You and I both have two daughters. The profound message we should be giving to them is that their gender creates no limitations for them to live up to their G-d-given potential. Yet, I fear that with the loss of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor from the United States Supreme Court, we are sending the opposite message."

However, Salazar conceded that "the fact you have not selected a distinguished woman in the mold of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is not a reason for disqualification." How grandiose of you, senator. I can hear John Roberts now, upon confirmation: "Thank you, senators, for looking beyond my obvious liability — my gender. You took a chance on me, confirming me despite the irrevocable damage I may do to the girls of our nation, who, like my own daughter, dream, as they play with their Justice Barbies, that one day some open-minded president will nominate them instead of some slice of Wonder Bread — well, me — to the Supreme Court. I'm so sorry I am a man, but I will try my very best not to be too much of a Neanderthal in robes."

Salazar's letter was not an isolated incident in Congress. When rumors were flying that Chief Justice Rehnquist might free a second seat on the court, four women senators (two Republicans, two Democrats) wrote to Justice O'Connor pleading with her to reconsider walking away from the court. They wanted her to be named the first woman chief justice. Why? Because they don't think there's another woman out there who someday might fill the slot? Because a woman will never be considered outside of their ridiculous suggestion?

We really aren't this silly, are we? Bush defied conventional wisdom — on the Left and Right — when he picked a guy to fill the O'Connor seat. Good for him.

Am I a self-loathing woman? No, just looking for a qualified judge chosen not because of the rules of an identity-politics game, but because he's (or she's) the qualified American who the president wants, period.

Novel, I know. Devoid of the kind of overwrought emotive nonsense that has surrounded the Justice O'Connor retirement. One Supreme Court writer (Slate's Dahlia Lithwick) wrote just before the big O'Connor announcement: "What we forget — what I forget — is that O'Connor single-handedly blew open more doors for young women than almost any human being alive on this planet. What we forget is that it's possible to be baffled by her ideology, worried by her power at the center of the high court, anxious about many of her views, and still feel the impulse to hug her."

Donate to JWR


I think I'll skip the girl-power hugs and stick to a nominee's judicial qualifications.

A Chicago Tribune headline read "Women express disappointment that court will have only 1 female." No offense to Justice O'Connor and others, but I wouldn't be surprised if you stood on a street corner (preferably not across from the Supreme Court), randomly asked women walking by who the other female Supreme Court justice is, and got the wrong response. Maybe Laura Bush? Or Hillary Clinton? She's a judge, right? If you did this a month ago — before O'Connor made news — asking for the name of any woman on the Supreme Court, I don't think you would have gotten too many right answers.

Ronald Reagan appointed Sandra Day O'Connor as the first female justice in July 1981. That was an important historic milestone (look, gals, no glass ceiling). So, by now — you would think — we would all be capable of taking a collective deep breath, look at John Roberts on his merits, then look at the next nominee on his — or her — merits, and stop insulting American women. There'll be another woman on the Supreme Court, but hopefully it won't be because of her gender. It will be because she's the qualified judge the president decided is capable of carrying out such an immense, crucial duty.

President Bush set a healthy precedent with Justice Roberts. I hope the girls understand that.

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

Comment by clicking here.

Archives

© 2005, Newspaper Enterprise Assn.

Columnists

Toons

Lifestyles