The hard cold truth of modern style racism

[IM2]

What are your solutions? You never ask for any in threads whites make, so don't start here.

You have none..OK.
Actually I ask for solutions all the time..not that I know the ethnicity of all the posters here. That explains a lot. You wouldn't really know a lot of my posts because you're a one trick pony. If it doesn't dovetail into some sort of racist polemic..you have nothing cogent to say.

You argue a strawman argument citing states with low black populations to serve as a reason to deny, then ask me about a solution. So here is my solution, QUIT DENYING that the lack of diversity on state supreme courts is due to past and present racism. That is the first thing that must be done.

OK..just for fun..show me my denial..LOL! My quote is right above us, "If your point was simply to bring attention to this issue..I agree..Blacks are not represented in some states and under-represented in others. Institutional racism will be with us for generations."

Tell me, do you even differentiate between posters here..or do you just respond to any as though we are all...'some white dude'? I ask because this is not the first time you've responded to me..as though you haven't read a thing I wrote.

Oh..and as far as the lack of representation in ALL states being due to racism..well..probably not..in those States that have minimal Black population. Not that the States have not been racist..as have been all areas of the US...but because the pool of qualified black applicants may be low..and the percentage of blacks in the population argues against it. It appears that you are arguing for Black representation even in those States with minimal Black population as a mean to redress your grievance. Is this a correct assessment? Are you averaging Black population percentages across the US and applying them to all States/ Because that's a bit crazy..States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices. I would have thought that that is the crux of your argument.

So..you have stated what the first thing is..that you feel must be done..what's the second?.

Again...any cogent solutions?

I gave you a solution. You wanted to bring up states with low black populations instead of addressing this as a national problem that the study presented when it said that nation wide people of color are 40 percent but make up 15 percent of the justices. That white men are 1/3 of the population but 58 percent of the justices. That's where your denial come in. And I do believe I hit reply just like I did now and that means I read your post and responded to it.

So again, my response is that whites stop denying the problem by talking about states with minimal black populations. There is a reason few blacks live in Montana, a high population of white supremacist groups. Same with Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington and Oregon. So racism plays a huge role in these matters.

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

Recognizing a problem exists is the first step to a solution. Legal experts created this study and their concern is based on a complete knowledge of how this system operates. They are not some white person in a discussion thread who enters the thread to dismiss racism as a factor.

Only a fool ignores that the study was about a national problem. Only a fool tries to argue basted on a few mostly white states.

This is the title of the study.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve
A new Brennan Center report details vast racial and gender disparities on state supreme courts around the country.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve

It is not just about blacks.

State Supreme Court Diversity

"This deficit of diversity among judges threatens the legitimacy of the judiciary in the eyes of the communities it serves. As former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Yvette McGee Brown observed, “The public’s perception of justice suffers . . . when the only people of color in a courthouse are in handcuffs.” This is particularly so in light of the vast racial disparities in the American criminal justice system, where 1 in 3 Black men are incarcerated in their lifetimes, compared with 1 in 17 white A 2015 National Center for State Courts survey of public confidence in state courts found a “massive racial gap” in trust in the fairness of the courts, revealing a “deep distrust of courts among African Americans.”

An absence of judicial diversity also limits the perspectives available to inform judicial deliberations, undermining state courts’ ability to develop a legal jurisprudence for an increasingly diverse America. Research shows that judicial diversity enriches judicial decision-making, promotes public confidence in the judiciary, and establishes role models across demographic groups.

Many factors drive this, including a long history of racial and gender discrimination and inequities in access to law schools and the legal bar (see Part II, “A History of Discrimination and Structural Hurdles”). Women and people of color continue to be underrepresented in the legal profession, and prior research has found that structural barriers — including implicit and explicit biases, disparities in access to mentoring, and unequal work assignments — impact their advancement into leadership positions in the law, which can in turn impact who reaches the bench.”

And these guys made some suggestions you chose not to read.

Racial and Gender Diversity Sorely Lacking in America’s Courts - Center for American Progress

I have not argued against my OP's opinions. Wyoming has just over 500,000 whites and 100,000 people of color. Washington has 5 million whites and over 2 million people of color. Montana has 884,000 whites and 122,000 people of color. Vermont has 600,000 whites and 38,000 people of color. Ok? You offer nothing but an excuse because we aren't talking about states with no people of color.

Alabama has 3.2 million whites and 1.7 million people of color.

And this is the Alabama state supreme court.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

As of this very second, 24 states have all white supreme courts. 18 state supreme courts have NEVER had a non white justice. In 2019. Yet in places like this people want to argue about how things are all in the past, or some other silly auto response some whites have when people of color speak truth.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve
A new Brennan Center report details vast racial and gender disparities on state supreme courts around the country.
Alicia Bannon, Laila Robbins
July 23, 2019

We spent a year studying the gender and racial makeup of state supreme courts, which are typically the final arbiters on state law. Our new report, State Supreme Court Diversity, paints a bleak picture of the demographic makeup of these powerful courts. It also points to judicial elections as a key inflection point for addressing the racial disparities we found.

Currently, white men are dramatically overrepresented on state supreme court benches. Though white men make up less than a third of the population, they hold a majority of seats on state supreme courts. Meanwhile, though people of color make up nearly 40 percent of the U.S. population, they hold only 15 percent of state supreme court seats.

Twenty-four states currently have an all-white supreme court bench. This includes eight states in which people of color are at least a quarter of the state’s general population. And in states that have at least one justice of color, there are substantial gaps between the diversity in a state’s general population and its high court bench: the percentage of people of color on the bench is higher than their representation in the state’s population in only five states.

Eighteen states have never had a Black justice on their state supreme court. And 13 states have not seated a single justice of color since at least 1960, the earliest year for which we had comprehensive data.

Elections have rarely been a path to the bench for people of color. Since 1960, only 17 justices of color have first reached the bench through an election, comprising 4 percent of initially elected justices. Comparatively, 141 justices of color were initially appointed to the bench since 1960, comprising 12 percent of all initially appointed justices.

Although candidates of color were more likely to have prior judicial experience as challengers to incumbents or as candidates for open seats, they won less often than their white counterparts.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve

"I see racists, they be everywhere 'cept theyz don't know theyz racist. So what if our democrat governor wore black face"

 

[Olde Europe]

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

I have to admit, I am a bit pissed about the above.

Acknowledging the problem would be a huge first step. It might be followed by smart folks sitting down and devising strategies how to mitigate, or even solve, it. That's not easy, and the fact that IM2 doesn't have a solution doesn't make him a troll.

The national statistic shows that the problem is more prevalent than just pertaining to a hand full of States. Including statistics of all people of color acknowledges that not just Blacks are not properly represented. Doing so not a mistake; it adds to the description of the problem.

Solutions are particularly hard, since states have a panoply of ways to appoint / elect State justices and judges, and every solution would have to be modeled according these modes of selection. Moreover, in case you are, as I think, interested in improving racial justice, it is within your purview to think about solutions as much as it is within IM2's, if not more so.

I take it, you mean that as you said it: "States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices." That, the Fleegle-Principle, should be the starting point. And if half of a state's population is black, that means every other newly appointed / elected State Justice has to be black, no? And if the portion of blacks is just 1/23, make every twenty third justice a black person. Oh, just in case, same goes for Hispanics and Asians, and, while you're at it, make at least every other judge / justice a woman.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

I have to admit, I am a bit pissed about the above.

Acknowledging the problem would be a huge first step. It might be followed by smart folks sitting down and devising strategies how to mitigate, or even solve, it. That's not easy, and the fact that IM2 doesn't have a solution doesn't make him a troll.

The national statistic shows that the problem is more prevalent than just pertaining to a hand full of States. Including statistics of all people of color acknowledges that not just Blacks are not properly represented. Doing so not a mistake; it adds to the description of the problem.

Solutions are particularly hard, since states have a panoply of ways to appoint / elect State justices and judges, and every solution would have to be modeled according these modes of selection. Moreover, in case you are, as I think, interested in improving racial justice, it is within your purview to think about solutions as much as it is within IM2's, if not more so.

I take it, you mean that as you said it: "States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices." That, the Fleegle-Principle, should be the starting point. And if half of a state's population is black, that means every other newly appointed / elected State Justice has to be black, no? And if the portion of blacks is just 1/23, make every twenty third justice a black person. Oh, just in case, same goes for Hispanics and Asians, and, while you're at it, make at least every other judge / justice a woman.

Nope..that is not what I think makes him a troll..it is his..call it...'body of work'..here..and I have reviewed it. He is a one trick pony whose vast majority of posts could be termed 'race-baiting'...I stand by my opinion. I am NOT of the prevalent opinion that a Black person cannot be racist against white men or that it is somehow, 'excusable', given the historical context.

Acknowledgement without action is just hot air..used to propel politicians hopes..at the expense of action.
Thank you for your suggestions...for the most part they make sense. My 'Fleegle' principle cuts both ways though..in States with very small percentages.....many on the national level would still be upset at what they perceive of as..all white benches. I'm totally on board with using the same principle as regard women and other significant portions of a State's demographic.Women are still underrepresented at the top level of society..including the Judiciary. I would love to see Native American Judges in Montana and North/South Dakota...I do believe that if a State is majority Black...that the government should reflect that..top to bottom. I'm against using national statistics, as regards Demographic Proportioning...applied willy-nilly to State Government. The major stumbling block to the Fleegle principle would be in those states that elect their Justices. I'm not sure how any application in those cases would not run afoul of the courts. Constitutional change in the State's Constitutions would be the only answer I could see.

My point in the exchange with IM2 was to see if he had it in him to propose any cogent reform on his own. He did not. Instead he indulged in rhetorical footwork and played fast and loose with the stats. As he has stated time and again..in fact, it is a theme of his....he feels no need to engage with a white man about black problems. So be it.

Sorry if you got upset....sometimes I apply my peculiar code in an overly obtuse and abrasive manner.''

Just for a laugh..this was my first post..on this thread:

The hard cold truth of modern style racism

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

You have none..OK.
Actually I ask for solutions all the time..not that I know the ethnicity of all the posters here. That explains a lot. You wouldn't really know a lot of my posts because you're a one trick pony. If it doesn't dovetail into some sort of racist polemic..you have nothing cogent to say.

You argue a strawman argument citing states with low black populations to serve as a reason to deny, then ask me about a solution. So here is my solution, QUIT DENYING that the lack of diversity on state supreme courts is due to past and present racism. That is the first thing that must be done.

OK..just for fun..show me my denial..LOL! My quote is right above us, "If your point was simply to bring attention to this issue..I agree..Blacks are not represented in some states and under-represented in others. Institutional racism will be with us for generations."

Tell me, do you even differentiate between posters here..or do you just respond to any as though we are all...'some white dude'? I ask because this is not the first time you've responded to me..as though you haven't read a thing I wrote.

Oh..and as far as the lack of representation in ALL states being due to racism..well..probably not..in those States that have minimal Black population. Not that the States have not been racist..as have been all areas of the US...but because the pool of qualified black applicants may be low..and the percentage of blacks in the population argues against it. It appears that you are arguing for Black representation even in those States with minimal Black population as a mean to redress your grievance. Is this a correct assessment? Are you averaging Black population percentages across the US and applying them to all States/ Because that's a bit crazy..States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices. I would have thought that that is the crux of your argument.

So..you have stated what the first thing is..that you feel must be done..what's the second?.

Again...any cogent solutions?

I gave you a solution. You wanted to bring up states with low black populations instead of addressing this as a national problem that the study presented when it said that nation wide people of color are 40 percent but make up 15 percent of the justices. That white men are 1/3 of the population but 58 percent of the justices. That's where your denial come in. And I do believe I hit reply just like I did now and that means I read your post and responded to it.

So again, my response is that whites stop denying the problem by talking about states with minimal black populations. There is a reason few blacks live in Montana, a high population of white supremacist groups. Same with Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington and Oregon. So racism plays a huge role in these matters.

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

Recognizing a problem exists is the first step to a solution. Legal experts created this study and their concern is based on a complete knowledge of how this system operates. They are not some white person in a discussion thread who enters the thread to dismiss racism as a factor.

Only a fool ignores that the study was about a national problem. Only a fool tries to argue basted on a few mostly white states.

This is the title of the study.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve
A new Brennan Center report details vast racial and gender disparities on state supreme courts around the country.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve

It is not just about blacks.

State Supreme Court Diversity

"This deficit of diversity among judges threatens the legitimacy of the judiciary in the eyes of the communities it serves. As former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Yvette McGee Brown observed, “The public’s perception of justice suffers . . . when the only people of color in a courthouse are in handcuffs.” This is particularly so in light of the vast racial disparities in the American criminal justice system, where 1 in 3 Black men are incarcerated in their lifetimes, compared with 1 in 17 white A 2015 National Center for State Courts survey of public confidence in state courts found a “massive racial gap” in trust in the fairness of the courts, revealing a “deep distrust of courts among African Americans.”

An absence of judicial diversity also limits the perspectives available to inform judicial deliberations, undermining state courts’ ability to develop a legal jurisprudence for an increasingly diverse America. Research shows that judicial diversity enriches judicial decision-making, promotes public confidence in the judiciary, and establishes role models across demographic groups.

Many factors drive this, including a long history of racial and gender discrimination and inequities in access to law schools and the legal bar (see Part II, “A History of Discrimination and Structural Hurdles”). Women and people of color continue to be underrepresented in the legal profession, and prior research has found that structural barriers — including implicit and explicit biases, disparities in access to mentoring, and unequal work assignments — impact their advancement into leadership positions in the law, which can in turn impact who reaches the bench.”

And these guys made some suggestions you chose not to read.

View attachment 274241

Racial and Gender Diversity Sorely Lacking in America’s Courts - Center for American Progress

I have not argued against my OP's opinions. Wyoming has just over 500,000 whites and 100,000 people of color. Washington has 5 million whites and over 2 million people of color. Montana has 884,000 whites and 122,000 people of color. Vermont has 600,000 whites and 38,000 people of color. Ok? You offer nothing but an excuse because we aren't talking about states with no people of color.

Alabama has 3.2 million whites and 1.7 million people of color.

And this is the Alabama state supreme court.

I did not..at any time..dismiss racism as a factor..in most cases..I've acknowledged it several times in fact. I do not see it as a meaningful factor in State's where the Black population is so low as to render the point moot. In other States, it is the defining factor. This is not to leave out other people of color..in those states where they have a significant percentage. Also, as Olde Europe reminded me..women are underrepresented....grossly so..in many states. 50% of the population should get 50% of the offices. Assuming that there exists a qualified pool of applicants.

We are talking about all 50 states. Each is unique...Alabama is a disgrace..Idaho is a 'meh'. Despite many people's belief...Idaho is not busting at the seams with ardent racists. It is as stupid a belief as saying that every inner city kid in Chicago has a bag of crack in one hand and a gun in the other.

 

[Correll]

You have none..OK.
Actually I ask for solutions all the time..not that I know the ethnicity of all the posters here. That explains a lot. You wouldn't really know a lot of my posts because you're a one trick pony. If it doesn't dovetail into some sort of racist polemic..you have nothing cogent to say.

You argue a strawman argument citing states with low black populations to serve as a reason to deny, then ask me about a solution. So here is my solution, QUIT DENYING that the lack of diversity on state supreme courts is due to past and present racism. That is the first thing that must be done.

OK..just for fun..show me my denial..LOL! My quote is right above us, "If your point was simply to bring attention to this issue..I agree..Blacks are not represented in some states and under-represented in others. Institutional racism will be with us for generations."

Tell me, do you even differentiate between posters here..or do you just respond to any as though we are all...'some white dude'? I ask because this is not the first time you've responded to me..as though you haven't read a thing I wrote.

Oh..and as far as the lack of representation in ALL states being due to racism..well..probably not..in those States that have minimal Black population. Not that the States have not been racist..as have been all areas of the US...but because the pool of qualified black applicants may be low..and the percentage of blacks in the population argues against it. It appears that you are arguing for Black representation even in those States with minimal Black population as a mean to redress your grievance. Is this a correct assessment? Are you averaging Black population percentages across the US and applying them to all States/ Because that's a bit crazy..States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices. I would have thought that that is the crux of your argument.

So..you have stated what the first thing is..that you feel must be done..what's the second?.

Again...any cogent solutions?

I gave you a solution. You wanted to bring up states with low black populations instead of addressing this as a national problem that the study presented when it said that nation wide people of color are 40 percent but make up 15 percent of the justices. That white men are 1/3 of the population but 58 percent of the justices. That's where your denial come in. And I do believe I hit reply just like I did now and that means I read your post and responded to it.

So again, my response is that whites stop denying the problem by talking about states with minimal black populations. There is a reason few blacks live in Montana, a high population of white supremacist groups. Same with Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington and Oregon. So racism plays a huge role in these matters.

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

Recognizing a problem exists is the first step to a solution. Legal experts created this study and their concern is based on a complete knowledge of how this system operates. They are not some white person in a discussion thread who enters the thread to dismiss racism as a factor.

Only a fool ignores that the study was about a national problem. Only a fool tries to argue basted on a few mostly white states.

This is the title of the study.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve
A new Brennan Center report details vast racial and gender disparities on state supreme courts around the country.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve

It is not just about blacks.

State Supreme Court Diversity

"This deficit of diversity among judges threatens the legitimacy of the judiciary in the eyes of the communities it serves. As former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Yvette McGee Brown observed, “The public’s perception of justice suffers . . . when the only people of color in a courthouse are in handcuffs.” This is particularly so in light of the vast racial disparities in the American criminal justice system, where 1 in 3 Black men are incarcerated in their lifetimes, compared with 1 in 17 white A 2015 National Center for State Courts survey of public confidence in state courts found a “massive racial gap” in trust in the fairness of the courts, revealing a “deep distrust of courts among African Americans.”

An absence of judicial diversity also limits the perspectives available to inform judicial deliberations, undermining state courts’ ability to develop a legal jurisprudence for an increasingly diverse America. Research shows that judicial diversity enriches judicial decision-making, promotes public confidence in the judiciary, and establishes role models across demographic groups.

Many factors drive this, including a long history of racial and gender discrimination and inequities in access to law schools and the legal bar (see Part II, “A History of Discrimination and Structural Hurdles”). Women and people of color continue to be underrepresented in the legal profession, and prior research has found that structural barriers — including implicit and explicit biases, disparities in access to mentoring, and unequal work assignments — impact their advancement into leadership positions in the law, which can in turn impact who reaches the bench.”

And these guys made some suggestions you chose not to read.

View attachment 274241

Racial and Gender Diversity Sorely Lacking in America’s Courts - Center for American Progress

I have not argued against my OP's opinions. Wyoming has just over 500,000 whites and 100,000 people of color. Washington has 5 million whites and over 2 million people of color. Montana has 884,000 whites and 122,000 people of color. Vermont has 600,000 whites and 38,000 people of color. Ok? You offer nothing but an excuse because we aren't talking about states with no people of color.

Alabama has 3.2 million whites and 1.7 million people of color.

And this is the Alabama state supreme court.

Judges are not supposed to represent ethnic groups. They are to interpret the law.

 

[protectionist]

I remember and you're still telling yourself that lie. I produced evidence. What you said is backed by nothing.

AA doesn't discriminate against whites. Whites aren't entitled to all the jobs or admissions. SAT scores are not the only qualification for college admittance and more unqualified whites have been given jobs over qualified people of color. White women have benefited the most from AA. That means daughters, wives, and mothers, of white men are not being discriminated against.

Well, if you wish to bury yourself, you can do that. Every person in America, of every race, knows that AA discriminates against whites, and in many cases, discriminates against other non-black races too, when the favors are given only to blacks.

Everything you just stated here is preposterous and was completely refuted in my post (# 173) that you quoted.

Simply put, you're just another black supremacist, racist, supporter of AA discrimination, who is completely comfortable with that # 1 largest and worst racial discrimination in America, since it benefits blacks, and you don't care who it hurts.

You are the # 1 loudest spokesman for white supremacism in America. If anybody fuels their fore, YOU AND YOUR BULLSHIT DO.

 

[protectionist]

And this is the Alabama state supreme court.

Maybe it just so happens they are the most QUALIFIED.

But you'd rather stick somebody on there just because he's black, you Affirmative Action racist pig.

 

[IM2]

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

I have to admit, I am a bit pissed about the above.

Acknowledging the problem would be a huge first step. It might be followed by smart folks sitting down and devising strategies how to mitigate, or even solve, it. That's not easy, and the fact that IM2 doesn't have a solution doesn't make him a troll.

The national statistic shows that the problem is more prevalent than just pertaining to a hand full of States. Including statistics of all people of color acknowledges that not just Blacks are not properly represented. Doing so not a mistake; it adds to the description of the problem.

Solutions are particularly hard, since states have a panoply of ways to appoint / elect State justices and judges, and every solution would have to be modeled according these modes of selection. Moreover, in case you are, as I think, interested in improving racial justice, it is within your purview to think about solutions as much as it is within IM2's, if not more so.

I take it, you mean that as you said it: "States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices." That, the Fleegle-Principle, should be the starting point. And if half of a state's population is black, that means every other newly appointed / elected State Justice has to be black, no? And if the portion of blacks is just 1/23, make every twenty third justice a black person. Oh, just in case, same goes for Hispanics and Asians, and, while you're at it, make at least every other judge / justice a woman.

Nope..that is not what I think makes him a troll..it is his..call it...'body of work'..here..and I have reviewed it. He is a one trick pony whose vast majority of posts could be termed 'race-baiting'...I stand by my opinion. I am NOT of the prevalent opinion that a Black person cannot be racist against white men or that it is somehow, 'excusable', given the historical context.

Acknowledgement without action is just hot air..used to propel politicians hopes..at the expense of action.
Thank you for your suggestions...for the most part they make sense. My 'Fleegle' principle cuts both ways though..in States with very small percentages.....many on the national level would still be upset at what they perceive of as..all white benches. I'm totally on board with using the same principle as regard women and other significant portions of a State's demographic.Women are still underrepresented at the top level of society..including the Judiciary. I would love to see Native American Judges in Montana and North/South Dakota...I do believe that if a State is majority Black...that the government should reflect that..top to bottom. I'm against using national statistics, as regards Demographic Proportioning...applied willy-nilly to State Government. The major stumbling block to the Fleegle principle would be in those states that elect their Justices. I'm not sure how any application in those cases would not run afoul of the courts. Constitutional change in the State's Constitutions would be the only answer I could see.

My point in the exchange with IM2 was to see if he had it in him to propose any cogent reform on his own. He did not. Instead he indulged in rhetorical footwork and played fast and loose with the stats. As he has stated time and again..in fact, it is a theme of his....he feels no need to engage with a white man about black problems. So be it.

Sorry if you got upset....sometimes I apply my peculiar code in an overly obtuse and abrasive manner.

BS. I am engaging whites now. What I will not do is have somebody that has not face white racism call blacks racist because they got called a name. You ask me for a solution, and yet you don't provide an argument that makes sense. Your whole argument wants to exclude what legal experts have determined on an excuse of sparsely populated states.What you call racism by blacks isn't. And until you live as a person of color and live, you aren't qualified to be making the claim that blacks can be as racist as whites. I don't race bait, but it's easier for you to call a thread showing how whites benefit because of your race baiting then accepting the fact that you get shown ii's true and you can't dispute it.

This thread is about the underrepresentation of people of color in state supreme courts. You can try making all the excuses you want here in a most alt right echo chamber, but if I had you on a debate stage, you have already lost.

Links are provided for a reason. Learn to read the information in them. You see, people like you want to look for reasons to deny racism. You can't face the truth so you try the personal attack. You've not reviewed ng. You are just another angry white racist who is mad because I don't say what you want and need to hear.

"A federal lawsuit alleges the voting system for some Arkansas judges violates black residents' rights by diluting the strength of the vote.

Lawyers for the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund filed the lawsuit Tuesday. It says that because the state's seven Supreme Court judges are elected statewide instead of by district, the white voting bloc overpowers the votes of black Arkansas residents. The suit says that's why no black judge has ever been elected to the court."

NAACP files federal suit against Arkansas judicial voting

NAACP sues Alabama because voters elected all white judges to the state’s top courts

https://yellowhammernews.com/naacp-...ctions-resulted-in-all-white-judges/undefined
Voting rights lawsuits challenge lack of black high court justices
Louisiana High Court Races Rigged Against Blacks, NAACP Says (1)
Fair Courts E-lert: NAACP Challenges At-Large Voting in Judicial Elections; President Obama Makes Mark on Bay Area Courts

"Five states—California, Connecticut, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Oregon—have a higher proportion of people of color on their state supreme courts than their minority populations as a whole.

In the 22 states that have judicial elections, the report found that far fewer minority judges initially made it onto the bench through elections, and were far more likely to voted out after an interim appointment. Only 17 judges of color, or 4% of initially elected judges, reached the bench for the first time through an election between 1960 and 2018, according to the report. By contrast, 141 judges of color were initially appointed to the bench, representing 12 percent of all appointees.

Advocacy groups have raised concern in recent years about racial bias in judicial elections. In recent years, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has filed two lawsuits to challenge election processes."

Almost Half of State Supreme Courts Have Only White Judges, Report Finds

And I find it funny how white men talk about the Fleegle Principle like there's no problem with 58 percent of the state judges coming from 33 percent of the population. So again, the argument about states with sparse populations of people of color is irrelevant when states with large populations of people of color have all white supreme courts.

 

[IM2]

You argue a strawman argument citing states with low black populations to serve as a reason to deny, then ask me about a solution. So here is my solution, QUIT DENYING that the lack of diversity on state supreme courts is due to past and present racism. That is the first thing that must be done.

OK..just for fun..show me my denial..LOL! My quote is right above us, "If your point was simply to bring attention to this issue..I agree..Blacks are not represented in some states and under-represented in others. Institutional racism will be with us for generations."

Tell me, do you even differentiate between posters here..or do you just respond to any as though we are all...'some white dude'? I ask because this is not the first time you've responded to me..as though you haven't read a thing I wrote.

Oh..and as far as the lack of representation in ALL states being due to racism..well..probably not..in those States that have minimal Black population. Not that the States have not been racist..as have been all areas of the US...but because the pool of qualified black applicants may be low..and the percentage of blacks in the population argues against it. It appears that you are arguing for Black representation even in those States with minimal Black population as a mean to redress your grievance. Is this a correct assessment? Are you averaging Black population percentages across the US and applying them to all States/ Because that's a bit crazy..States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices. I would have thought that that is the crux of your argument.

So..you have stated what the first thing is..that you feel must be done..what's the second?.

Again...any cogent solutions?

I gave you a solution. You wanted to bring up states with low black populations instead of addressing this as a national problem that the study presented when it said that nation wide people of color are 40 percent but make up 15 percent of the justices. That white men are 1/3 of the population but 58 percent of the justices. That's where your denial come in. And I do believe I hit reply just like I did now and that means I read your post and responded to it.

So again, my response is that whites stop denying the problem by talking about states with minimal black populations. There is a reason few blacks live in Montana, a high population of white supremacist groups. Same with Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington and Oregon. So racism plays a huge role in these matters.

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

Recognizing a problem exists is the first step to a solution. Legal experts created this study and their concern is based on a complete knowledge of how this system operates. They are not some white person in a discussion thread who enters the thread to dismiss racism as a factor.

Only a fool ignores that the study was about a national problem. Only a fool tries to argue basted on a few mostly white states.

This is the title of the study.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve
A new Brennan Center report details vast racial and gender disparities on state supreme courts around the country.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve

It is not just about blacks.

State Supreme Court Diversity

"This deficit of diversity among judges threatens the legitimacy of the judiciary in the eyes of the communities it serves. As former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Yvette McGee Brown observed, “The public’s perception of justice suffers . . . when the only people of color in a courthouse are in handcuffs.” This is particularly so in light of the vast racial disparities in the American criminal justice system, where 1 in 3 Black men are incarcerated in their lifetimes, compared with 1 in 17 white A 2015 National Center for State Courts survey of public confidence in state courts found a “massive racial gap” in trust in the fairness of the courts, revealing a “deep distrust of courts among African Americans.”

An absence of judicial diversity also limits the perspectives available to inform judicial deliberations, undermining state courts’ ability to develop a legal jurisprudence for an increasingly diverse America. Research shows that judicial diversity enriches judicial decision-making, promotes public confidence in the judiciary, and establishes role models across demographic groups.

Many factors drive this, including a long history of racial and gender discrimination and inequities in access to law schools and the legal bar (see Part II, “A History of Discrimination and Structural Hurdles”). Women and people of color continue to be underrepresented in the legal profession, and prior research has found that structural barriers — including implicit and explicit biases, disparities in access to mentoring, and unequal work assignments — impact their advancement into leadership positions in the law, which can in turn impact who reaches the bench.”

And these guys made some suggestions you chose not to read.

View attachment 274241

Racial and Gender Diversity Sorely Lacking in America’s Courts - Center for American Progress

I have not argued against my OP's opinions. Wyoming has just over 500,000 whites and 100,000 people of color. Washington has 5 million whites and over 2 million people of color. Montana has 884,000 whites and 122,000 people of color. Vermont has 600,000 whites and 38,000 people of color. Ok? You offer nothing but an excuse because we aren't talking about states with no people of color.

Alabama has 3.2 million whites and 1.7 million people of color.

And this is the Alabama state supreme court.

I did not..at any time..dismiss racism as a factor..in most cases..I've acknowledged it several times in fact. I do not see it as a meaningful factor in State's where the Black population is so low as to render the point moot. In other States, it is the defining factor. This is not to leave out other people of color..in those states where they have a significant percentage. Also, as Olde Europe reminded me..women are underrepresented....grossly so..in many states. 50% of the population should get 50% of the offices. Assuming that there exists a qualified pool of applicants.

We are talking about all 50 states. Each is unique...Alabama is a disgrace..Idaho is a 'meh'. Despite many people's belief...Idaho is not busting at the seams with ardent racists. It is as stupid a belief as saying that every inner city kid in Chicago has a bag of crack in one hand and a gun in the other.

Yawn! I've been to Idaho.

 

[IM2]

I remember and you're still telling yourself that lie. I produced evidence. What you said is backed by nothing.

AA doesn't discriminate against whites. Whites aren't entitled to all the jobs or admissions. SAT scores are not the only qualification for college admittance and more unqualified whites have been given jobs over qualified people of color. White women have benefited the most from AA. That means daughters, wives, and mothers, of white men are not being discriminated against.

Well, if you wish to bury yourself, you can do that. Every person in America, of every race, knows that AA discriminates against whites, and in many cases, discriminates against other non-black races too, when the favors are given only to blacks.

Everything you just stated here is preposterous and was completely refuted in my post (# 173) that you quoted.

Simply put, you're just another black supremacist, racist, supporter of AA discrimination, who is completely comfortable with that # 1 largest and worst racial discrimination in America, since it benefits blacks, and you don't care who it hurts.

You are the # 1 loudest spokesman for white supremacism in America. If anybody fuels their fore, YOU AND YOUR BULLSHIT DO.

STFU.

 

[protectionist]

BS. I am engaging whites now. What I will not do is have somebody that has not face white racism call blacks racist because they got called a name. You ask me for a solution, and yet you don't provide an argument that makes sense. Your whole argument wants to exclude what legal experts have determined on an excuse of sparsely populated states.What you call racism by blacks isn't. And until you live as a person of color and live, you aren't qualified to be making the claim that blacks can be as racist as whites. I don't race bait, but it's easier for you to call a thread showing how whites benefit because of your race baiting then accepting the fact that you get shown ii's true and you can't dispute it.

This thread is about the underrepresentation of people of color in state supreme courts. You can try making all the excuses you want here in a most alt right echo chamber, but if I had you on a debate stage, you have already lost.

Links are provided for a reason. Learn to read the information in them. You see, people like you want to look for reasons to deny racism. You can't face the truth so you try the personal attack. You've not reviewed ng. You are just another angry white racist who is mad because I don't say what you want and need to hear.

"A federal lawsuit alleges the voting system for some Arkansas judges violates black residents' rights by diluting the strength of the vote.

Lawyers for the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund filed the lawsuit Tuesday. It says that because the state's seven Supreme Court judges are elected statewide instead of by district, the white voting bloc overpowers the votes of black Arkansas residents. The suit says that's why no black judge has ever been elected to the court."

NAACP files federal suit against Arkansas judicial voting

NAACP sues Alabama because voters elected all white judges to the state’s top courts

https://yellowhammernews.com/naacp-...ctions-resulted-in-all-white-judges/undefined
Voting rights lawsuits challenge lack of black high court justices
Louisiana High Court Races Rigged Against Blacks, NAACP Says (1)
Fair Courts E-lert: NAACP Challenges At-Large Voting in Judicial Elections; President Obama Makes Mark on Bay Area Courts

"Five states—California, Connecticut, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Oregon—have a higher proportion of people of color on their state supreme courts than their minority populations as a whole.

In the 22 states that have judicial elections, the report found that far fewer minority judges initially made it onto the bench through elections, and were far more likely to voted out after an interim appointment. Only 17 judges of color, or 4% of initially elected judges, reached the bench for the first time through an election between 1960 and 2018, according to the report. By contrast, 141 judges of color were initially appointed to the bench, representing 12 percent of all appointees.

Advocacy groups have raised concern in recent years about racial bias in judicial elections. In recent years, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has filed two lawsuits to challenge election processes."

Almost Half of State Supreme Courts Have Only White Judges, Report Finds

And I find it funny how white men talk about the Fleegle Principle like there's no problem with 58 percent of the state judges coming from 33 percent of the population. So again, the argument about states with sparse populations of people of color is irrelevant when states with large populations of people of color have all white supreme courts.

Blacks are far more racist that whites, and YOU are a prime example.

And the AA supporting NAACP is the # 1 most racist organization in America.

 

[IM2]

BS. I am engaging whites now. What I will not do is have somebody that has not face white racism call blacks racist because they got called a name. You ask me for a solution, and yet you don't provide an argument that makes sense. Your whole argument wants to exclude what legal experts have determined on an excuse of sparsely populated states.What you call racism by blacks isn't. And until you live as a person of color and live, you aren't qualified to be making the claim that blacks can be as racist as whites. I don't race bait, but it's easier for you to call a thread showing how whites benefit because of your race baiting then accepting the fact that you get shown ii's true and you can't dispute it.

This thread is about the underrepresentation of people of color in state supreme courts. You can try making all the excuses you want here in a most alt right echo chamber, but if I had you on a debate stage, you have already lost.

Links are provided for a reason. Learn to read the information in them. You see, people like you want to look for reasons to deny racism. You can't face the truth so you try the personal attack. You've not reviewed ng. You are just another angry white racist who is mad because I don't say what you want and need to hear.

"A federal lawsuit alleges the voting system for some Arkansas judges violates black residents' rights by diluting the strength of the vote.

Lawyers for the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund filed the lawsuit Tuesday. It says that because the state's seven Supreme Court judges are elected statewide instead of by district, the white voting bloc overpowers the votes of black Arkansas residents. The suit says that's why no black judge has ever been elected to the court."

NAACP files federal suit against Arkansas judicial voting

NAACP sues Alabama because voters elected all white judges to the state’s top courts

https://yellowhammernews.com/naacp-...ctions-resulted-in-all-white-judges/undefined
Voting rights lawsuits challenge lack of black high court justices
Louisiana High Court Races Rigged Against Blacks, NAACP Says (1)
Fair Courts E-lert: NAACP Challenges At-Large Voting in Judicial Elections; President Obama Makes Mark on Bay Area Courts

"Five states—California, Connecticut, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Oregon—have a higher proportion of people of color on their state supreme courts than their minority populations as a whole.

In the 22 states that have judicial elections, the report found that far fewer minority judges initially made it onto the bench through elections, and were far more likely to voted out after an interim appointment. Only 17 judges of color, or 4% of initially elected judges, reached the bench for the first time through an election between 1960 and 2018, according to the report. By contrast, 141 judges of color were initially appointed to the bench, representing 12 percent of all appointees.

Advocacy groups have raised concern in recent years about racial bias in judicial elections. In recent years, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has filed two lawsuits to challenge election processes."

Almost Half of State Supreme Courts Have Only White Judges, Report Finds

And I find it funny how white men talk about the Fleegle Principle like there's no problem with 58 percent of the state judges coming from 33 percent of the population. So again, the argument about states with sparse populations of people of color is irrelevant when states with large populations of people of color have all white supreme courts.

Blacks are far more racist that whites, and YOU are a prime example.

And the AA supporting NAACP is the # 1 most racist organization in America.

Post evidence of my racism. The NAACP was founded by blacks and whites. Whites are members of the NAACP.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

I have to admit, I am a bit pissed about the above.

Acknowledging the problem would be a huge first step. It might be followed by smart folks sitting down and devising strategies how to mitigate, or even solve, it. That's not easy, and the fact that IM2 doesn't have a solution doesn't make him a troll.

The national statistic shows that the problem is more prevalent than just pertaining to a hand full of States. Including statistics of all people of color acknowledges that not just Blacks are not properly represented. Doing so not a mistake; it adds to the description of the problem.

Solutions are particularly hard, since states have a panoply of ways to appoint / elect State justices and judges, and every solution would have to be modeled according these modes of selection. Moreover, in case you are, as I think, interested in improving racial justice, it is within your purview to think about solutions as much as it is within IM2's, if not more so.

I take it, you mean that as you said it: "States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices." That, the Fleegle-Principle, should be the starting point. And if half of a state's population is black, that means every other newly appointed / elected State Justice has to be black, no? And if the portion of blacks is just 1/23, make every twenty third justice a black person. Oh, just in case, same goes for Hispanics and Asians, and, while you're at it, make at least every other judge / justice a woman.

Nope..that is not what I think makes him a troll..it is his..call it...'body of work'..here..and I have reviewed it. He is a one trick pony whose vast majority of posts could be termed 'race-baiting'...I stand by my opinion. I am NOT of the prevalent opinion that a Black person cannot be racist against white men or that it is somehow, 'excusable', given the historical context.

Acknowledgement without action is just hot air..used to propel politicians hopes..at the expense of action.
Thank you for your suggestions...for the most part they make sense. My 'Fleegle' principle cuts both ways though..in States with very small percentages.....many on the national level would still be upset at what they perceive of as..all white benches. I'm totally on board with using the same principle as regard women and other significant portions of a State's demographic.Women are still underrepresented at the top level of society..including the Judiciary. I would love to see Native American Judges in Montana and North/South Dakota...I do believe that if a State is majority Black...that the government should reflect that..top to bottom. I'm against using national statistics, as regards Demographic Proportioning...applied willy-nilly to State Government. The major stumbling block to the Fleegle principle would be in those states that elect their Justices. I'm not sure how any application in those cases would not run afoul of the courts. Constitutional change in the State's Constitutions would be the only answer I could see.

My point in the exchange with IM2 was to see if he had it in him to propose any cogent reform on his own. He did not. Instead he indulged in rhetorical footwork and played fast and loose with the stats. As he has stated time and again..in fact, it is a theme of his....he feels no need to engage with a white man about black problems. So be it.

Sorry if you got upset....sometimes I apply my peculiar code in an overly obtuse and abrasive manner.

BS. I am engaging whites now. What I will not do is have somebody that has not face white racism call blacks racist because they got called a name. You ask me for a solution, and yet you don't provide an argument that makes sense. Your whole argument wants to exclude what legal experts have determined on an excuse of sparsely populated states.What you call racism by blacks isn't. And until you live as a person of color and live, you aren't qualified to be making the claim that blacks can be as racist as whites. I don't race bait, but it's easier for you to call a thread showing how whites benefit because of your race baiting then accepting the fact that you get shown ii's true and you can't dispute it.

This thread is about the underrepresentation of people of color in state supreme courts. You can try making all the excuses you want here in a most alt right echo chamber, but if I had you on a debate stage, you have already lost.

Links are provided for a reason. Learn to read the information in them. You see, people like you want to look for reasons to deny racism. You can't face the truth so you try the personal attack. You've not reviewed ng. You are just another angry white racist who is mad because I don't say what you want and need to hear.

"A federal lawsuit alleges the voting system for some Arkansas judges violates black residents' rights by diluting the strength of the vote.

Lawyers for the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund filed the lawsuit Tuesday. It says that because the state's seven Supreme Court judges are elected statewide instead of by district, the white voting bloc overpowers the votes of black Arkansas residents. The suit says that's why no black judge has ever been elected to the court."

NAACP files federal suit against Arkansas judicial voting

NAACP sues Alabama because voters elected all white judges to the state’s top courts

https://yellowhammernews.com/naacp-...ctions-resulted-in-all-white-judges/undefined
Voting rights lawsuits challenge lack of black high court justices
Louisiana High Court Races Rigged Against Blacks, NAACP Says (1)
Fair Courts E-lert: NAACP Challenges At-Large Voting in Judicial Elections; President Obama Makes Mark on Bay Area Courts

"Five states—California, Connecticut, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Oregon—have a higher proportion of people of color on their state supreme courts than their minority populations as a whole.

In the 22 states that have judicial elections, the report found that far fewer minority judges initially made it onto the bench through elections, and were far more likely to voted out after an interim appointment. Only 17 judges of color, or 4% of initially elected judges, reached the bench for the first time through an election between 1960 and 2018, according to the report. By contrast, 141 judges of color were initially appointed to the bench, representing 12 percent of all appointees.

Advocacy groups have raised concern in recent years about racial bias in judicial elections. In recent years, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has filed two lawsuits to challenge election processes."

Almost Half of State Supreme Courts Have Only White Judges, Report Finds

And I find it funny how white men talk about the Fleegle Principle like there's no problem with 58 percent of the state judges coming from 33 percent of the population. So again, the argument about states with sparse populations of people of color is irrelevant when states with large populations of people of color have all white supreme courts.

Uh huh,...and you respond to nothing that I say..and repeat the same thing over and over again. I won't resort to caps...but i will say just one more time..I reject the idea that we should apply a national standard based on percentages to a State court. Period.
I've acknowledged the problem..several times now...agreed that it's racist..in most cases... yet you remain hung up on the few states that I find a percentage argument moot in. Why is that? I've not denied any racism..yet you maintain that i do...I contend that you are so stuck on your agenda..that you don't read my posts..or are unable to parse their meaning.
A direct question..do you think that we should base how we choose judges in States with a low number of POC..based on a national average/ Simple question. Should Idaho or Wyoming be used to redress an imbalance in Alabama or Mississippi?

This..this is my issue: "And I find it funny how white men talk about the Fleegle Principle like there's no problem with 58 percent of the state judges coming from 33 percent of the population."

This is a spurious statistic..in this instance..as we are talking about State courts. the national percentage is Irrelevant...when we are talking about representation on the State level. All I'm saying is that it's all about the state in question. While it is of note that the the proportions are out of whack on a National level.....the problems, in this case, stem from a State issue..and the solution should be tailored to the individual state.

As an amusing note..would you be amenable to scaling back those few states with an over-representation of People of Color..in order to redress the demographic imbalance?

As for you dismissal of me as just another angry white racist, etc. etc.--whatever.

If that is what you are getting from me..than I can only pity you. Enjoy your day..I'll not bother you again with my nonsense.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

OK..just for fun..show me my denial..LOL! My quote is right above us, "If your point was simply to bring attention to this issue..I agree..Blacks are not represented in some states and under-represented in others. Institutional racism will be with us for generations."

Tell me, do you even differentiate between posters here..or do you just respond to any as though we are all...'some white dude'? I ask because this is not the first time you've responded to me..as though you haven't read a thing I wrote.

Oh..and as far as the lack of representation in ALL states being due to racism..well..probably not..in those States that have minimal Black population. Not that the States have not been racist..as have been all areas of the US...but because the pool of qualified black applicants may be low..and the percentage of blacks in the population argues against it. It appears that you are arguing for Black representation even in those States with minimal Black population as a mean to redress your grievance. Is this a correct assessment? Are you averaging Black population percentages across the US and applying them to all States/ Because that's a bit crazy..States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices. I would have thought that that is the crux of your argument.

So..you have stated what the first thing is..that you feel must be done..what's the second?.

Again...any cogent solutions?

I gave you a solution. You wanted to bring up states with low black populations instead of addressing this as a national problem that the study presented when it said that nation wide people of color are 40 percent but make up 15 percent of the justices. That white men are 1/3 of the population but 58 percent of the justices. That's where your denial come in. And I do believe I hit reply just like I did now and that means I read your post and responded to it.

So again, my response is that whites stop denying the problem by talking about states with minimal black populations. There is a reason few blacks live in Montana, a high population of white supremacist groups. Same with Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington and Oregon. So racism plays a huge role in these matters.

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

Recognizing a problem exists is the first step to a solution. Legal experts created this study and their concern is based on a complete knowledge of how this system operates. They are not some white person in a discussion thread who enters the thread to dismiss racism as a factor.

Only a fool ignores that the study was about a national problem. Only a fool tries to argue basted on a few mostly white states.

This is the title of the study.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve
A new Brennan Center report details vast racial and gender disparities on state supreme courts around the country.

State Supreme Courts Don’t Reflect the Diversity of the Communities They Serve

It is not just about blacks.

State Supreme Court Diversity

"This deficit of diversity among judges threatens the legitimacy of the judiciary in the eyes of the communities it serves. As former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Yvette McGee Brown observed, “The public’s perception of justice suffers . . . when the only people of color in a courthouse are in handcuffs.” This is particularly so in light of the vast racial disparities in the American criminal justice system, where 1 in 3 Black men are incarcerated in their lifetimes, compared with 1 in 17 white A 2015 National Center for State Courts survey of public confidence in state courts found a “massive racial gap” in trust in the fairness of the courts, revealing a “deep distrust of courts among African Americans.”

An absence of judicial diversity also limits the perspectives available to inform judicial deliberations, undermining state courts’ ability to develop a legal jurisprudence for an increasingly diverse America. Research shows that judicial diversity enriches judicial decision-making, promotes public confidence in the judiciary, and establishes role models across demographic groups.

Many factors drive this, including a long history of racial and gender discrimination and inequities in access to law schools and the legal bar (see Part II, “A History of Discrimination and Structural Hurdles”). Women and people of color continue to be underrepresented in the legal profession, and prior research has found that structural barriers — including implicit and explicit biases, disparities in access to mentoring, and unequal work assignments — impact their advancement into leadership positions in the law, which can in turn impact who reaches the bench.”

And these guys made some suggestions you chose not to read.

View attachment 274241

Racial and Gender Diversity Sorely Lacking in America’s Courts - Center for American Progress

I have not argued against my OP's opinions. Wyoming has just over 500,000 whites and 100,000 people of color. Washington has 5 million whites and over 2 million people of color. Montana has 884,000 whites and 122,000 people of color. Vermont has 600,000 whites and 38,000 people of color. Ok? You offer nothing but an excuse because we aren't talking about states with no people of color.

Alabama has 3.2 million whites and 1.7 million people of color.

And this is the Alabama state supreme court.

I did not..at any time..dismiss racism as a factor..in most cases..I've acknowledged it several times in fact. I do not see it as a meaningful factor in State's where the Black population is so low as to render the point moot. In other States, it is the defining factor. This is not to leave out other people of color..in those states where they have a significant percentage. Also, as Olde Europe reminded me..women are underrepresented....grossly so..in many states. 50% of the population should get 50% of the offices. Assuming that there exists a qualified pool of applicants.

We are talking about all 50 states. Each is unique...Alabama is a disgrace..Idaho is a 'meh'. Despite many people's belief...Idaho is not busting at the seams with ardent racists. It is as stupid a belief as saying that every inner city kid in Chicago has a bag of crack in one hand and a gun in the other.

Yawn! I've been to Idaho.

And I've been to Chicago...and Hammond...and Gary.
Yup...at last..we are in agreement....g'nite.

 

[IM2]

And here we have another one. He wants to hang on to an irrelevant premise a will try arguing it until hell freezes over.

 

[Shrimpbox]

What a false argument. You cannot get justice if the court is all,white. How many white justices decided the landmark brown vs. board of education? You people are incapable of reason.

 

[IM2]

What a false argument. You cannot get justice if the court is all,white. How many white justices decided the landmark brown vs. board of education? You people are incapable of reason.

How many state courts made rulings so as not to follow this?

 

[MizMolly]

You did not give me a solution...realizing the issue...admitting it..blah, blah, blah..is not a solution..it is at best an acknowledgment..that has no meaning if not followed by some sort of action.
Nope..now you are talking about stuff you know nothing about. no matter..I've come to believe that you are a racist troll...entertaining yourself--rock on. I will point out that lumping Washington in with your other named States is a bit silly..as Washington's demographics are quite different.

To be clear...only a fool would attempt to use national demographics to address State level issues..or the lack of same. 8 states in your study..or 16% of the States nationwide--have a clear issue with under-representation. This according to your OP--which is based on Statewide demographics. Also..it is ingenuous, at best, to open with a study that is solely directed at blacks..and then make the rookie mistake of lumping all people's of color together in order to make a larger demographic base and make it appear as though this percentage is the one that should be addressed. Other ethnic minorities have their own interests and goals and they may be radically different from the Black communities vision. It is NOT P.O.C. against the Whites..in some monolithic movement.

Your constant moving of the goalposts....ignoring your own OP's conclusions and failure to actually address any sort of solution--argue against your caring about this issue at all...it's just another piece of red meat to bring out the board racists for you to play with.

It's cool, everyone needs a hobby, after all.

I have to admit, I am a bit pissed about the above.

Acknowledging the problem would be a huge first step. It might be followed by smart folks sitting down and devising strategies how to mitigate, or even solve, it. That's not easy, and the fact that IM2 doesn't have a solution doesn't make him a troll.

The national statistic shows that the problem is more prevalent than just pertaining to a hand full of States. Including statistics of all people of color acknowledges that not just Blacks are not properly represented. Doing so not a mistake; it adds to the description of the problem.

Solutions are particularly hard, since states have a panoply of ways to appoint / elect State justices and judges, and every solution would have to be modeled according these modes of selection. Moreover, in case you are, as I think, interested in improving racial justice, it is within your purview to think about solutions as much as it is within IM2's, if not more so.

I take it, you mean that as you said it: "States are legitimately entitled to a fair representation of their populations in their State offices." That, the Fleegle-Principle, should be the starting point. And if half of a state's population is black, that means every other newly appointed / elected State Justice has to be black, no? And if the portion of blacks is just 1/23, make every twenty third justice a black person. Oh, just in case, same goes for Hispanics and Asians, and, while you're at it, make at least every other judge / justice a woman.

Nope..that is not what I think makes him a troll..it is his..call it...'body of work'..here..and I have reviewed it. He is a one trick pony whose vast majority of posts could be termed 'race-baiting'...I stand by my opinion. I am NOT of the prevalent opinion that a Black person cannot be racist against white men or that it is somehow, 'excusable', given the historical context.

Acknowledgement without action is just hot air..used to propel politicians hopes..at the expense of action.
Thank you for your suggestions...for the most part they make sense. My 'Fleegle' principle cuts both ways though..in States with very small percentages.....many on the national level would still be upset at what they perceive of as..all white benches. I'm totally on board with using the same principle as regard women and other significant portions of a State's demographic.Women are still underrepresented at the top level of society..including the Judiciary. I would love to see Native American Judges in Montana and North/South Dakota...I do believe that if a State is majority Black...that the government should reflect that..top to bottom. I'm against using national statistics, as regards Demographic Proportioning...applied willy-nilly to State Government. The major stumbling block to the Fleegle principle would be in those states that elect their Justices. I'm not sure how any application in those cases would not run afoul of the courts. Constitutional change in the State's Constitutions would be the only answer I could see.

My point in the exchange with IM2 was to see if he had it in him to propose any cogent reform on his own. He did not. Instead he indulged in rhetorical footwork and played fast and loose with the stats. As he has stated time and again..in fact, it is a theme of his....he feels no need to engage with a white man about black problems. So be it.

Sorry if you got upset....sometimes I apply my peculiar code in an overly obtuse and abrasive manner.

BS. I am engaging whites now. What I will not do is have somebody that has not face white racism call blacks racist because they got called a name. You ask me for a solution, and yet you don't provide an argument that makes sense. Your whole argument wants to exclude what legal experts have determined on an excuse of sparsely populated states.What you call racism by blacks isn't. And until you live as a person of color and live, you aren't qualified to be making the claim that blacks can be as racist as whites. I don't race bait, but it's easier for you to call a thread showing how whites benefit because of your race baiting then accepting the fact that you get shown ii's true and you can't dispute it.

This thread is about the underrepresentation of people of color in state supreme courts. You can try making all the excuses you want here in a most alt right echo chamber, but if I had you on a debate stage, you have already lost.

Links are provided for a reason. Learn to read the information in them. You see, people like you want to look for reasons to deny racism. You can't face the truth so you try the personal attack. You've not reviewed ng. You are just another angry white racist who is mad because I don't say what you want and need to hear.

"A federal lawsuit alleges the voting system for some Arkansas judges violates black residents' rights by diluting the strength of the vote.

Lawyers for the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund filed the lawsuit Tuesday. It says that because the state's seven Supreme Court judges are elected statewide instead of by district, the white voting bloc overpowers the votes of black Arkansas residents. The suit says that's why no black judge has ever been elected to the court."

NAACP files federal suit against Arkansas judicial voting

NAACP sues Alabama because voters elected all white judges to the state’s top courts

https://yellowhammernews.com/naacp-...ctions-resulted-in-all-white-judges/undefined
Voting rights lawsuits challenge lack of black high court justices
Louisiana High Court Races Rigged Against Blacks, NAACP Says (1)
Fair Courts E-lert: NAACP Challenges At-Large Voting in Judicial Elections; President Obama Makes Mark on Bay Area Courts

"Five states—California, Connecticut, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Oregon—have a higher proportion of people of color on their state supreme courts than their minority populations as a whole.

In the 22 states that have judicial elections, the report found that far fewer minority judges initially made it onto the bench through elections, and were far more likely to voted out after an interim appointment. Only 17 judges of color, or 4% of initially elected judges, reached the bench for the first time through an election between 1960 and 2018, according to the report. By contrast, 141 judges of color were initially appointed to the bench, representing 12 percent of all appointees.

Advocacy groups have raised concern in recent years about racial bias in judicial elections. In recent years, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has filed two lawsuits to challenge election processes."

Almost Half of State Supreme Courts Have Only White Judges, Report Finds

And I find it funny how white men talk about the Fleegle Principle like there's no problem with 58 percent of the state judges coming from 33 percent of the population. So again, the argument about states with sparse populations of people of color is irrelevant when states with large populations of people of color have all white supreme courts.

You aren’t white, you can’t tell whites how to feel. If blacks hate whites just for being white, that is racism. You are so blinded by your blackness you can’t see anyone else’s reality.

 

[MizMolly]

People aren’t bitching because the NBA is made up of mostly black players. If they are the most qualified, they should be hired.