September 21, 2020

If Trump nominates Barbara Lagoa to replace RBG, will Democrats make the "second Latina" argument? I see 2 big problems!

"An effort to install a second Latina on the high court would immediately raise the stakes of a nomination fight that quickly became a clash over principles of fairness and democratic legitimacy."

I just wanted to isolate that sentence, which appears in the middle of a Washington Post article by Isaac Stanley-Becker and Aaron C. Davis and called "Barbara Lagoa, Cuban American judge, rises on Trump’s Supreme Court list as allies emphasize Florida campaign edge."

First, I see that word "install," which I blogged about at length when we saw it in the text of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dying wish: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed."

As I explained at the time, "install" was not the normal word to use in the context of a new American President taking office. I won't be surprised to see a sudden vogue for "install." I'll be watching.

But that's not my motivation for writing this post. I want to talk about "a second Latina." Is this the incipient attack on Lagoa? We already have a Latina on the Court, so Trump, in a ham-handed attempt to do diversity, has failed! He would grossly over-represent Latinas on the Court!

Is that the attack they'd use or that they're testing right now or pretending that they'd use in order to scare Trump away from what would, in fact, be an excellent choice?

There are 2 big problems with the "second Latina" argument.

1. The "first Latina" is Sonia Sotomayor, who was born in the Bronx to parents who were born in Puerto Rico. Barbara Lagoa was born in Miami to parents who fled Cuba. You can group them together under the word "Latina," but if you care about diversity, you shouldn't be arguing that the proposed "second Latina" is just a repeat of an ethnicity already represented on the Court.

2. The "second Latina" argument radically exposes the problem with choosing people because of their ethnicity. You're saying just get one and then you've covered that group and you don't need another. This idea limits opportunities for those in the groups that you've posed as caring about. You're saying: We've got our Latina, so we don't need another; we can get back to hiring the type of person we always preferred.

I don't know if Trump will pick Barbara Lagoa, but I'll be very interested to see if Democrats unleash the "second Latina" argument. It's dangerous, and it should go horribly wrong.

77 comments:

tim in vermont said...

It’s pretzel logic all the way down.

This Person said...

I find it curious that what seems to me to be the obvious and unavoidable result of the diversity cult is presented as a novel revelation. Or, as I might have said as a 13 year old: duh!

rhhardin said...

With women the problem is always how long they can manage not to think like a woman. You want structure on the court, not feelings, and they'll probably only last a year or two before they revert to womanish reasoning. Latina isn't going to help.

Women can think like men but it makes them tense and anxious, and they wind up on the Women's Workplace Issues Committee even in STEM jobs.

Most men today unfortunately all seem to be social squishes too. You want an introvert man, is the bottom line. He's likely to be stable.

Heartless Aztec said...

I was in 1st grade Catholic school when the first Cuban refugees arrived in Florida. I can remember distinctly the Irish nun who taught us standing over a little boy my age and saying in her thick Irish brouge "Ay but yer' name chan't be Jesus."
So heres to hoping President Trump chooses former Florida Supreme Court Justice Barbara Lagoa as our next United States Supreme Court Justice.
And as my second aside, Cuban food rocks. Try the Columbia restaurant in St Augustine off King George St.

Ralph L said...

We could use a wiser Latina on the Court.

tim maguire said...

This is one way for identity politics to spread--Democrats choose on gender and skin colour all the time, that's who they are, that's what they do. Republicans argue that's not the right way to run things. But if they, as a defensive measure to own the libs, choose based on gender and skin color, how are they doing better?

Wilbur said...

Anne Althouse, with another rigorous skewering of the Leftist discriminatory mindset. Perhaps one of out Leftist friends here can explain why this the Dems should proceed on this scheme.

Kevin said...

The best way to stop discriminating based on race is to stop discriminating based on race.

Kevin said...

You can group them together under the word "Latina," but if you care about diversity, you shouldn't be arguing that the proposed "second Latina" is just a repeat of an ethnicity already represented on the Court.

Thankfully they have off-TelePrompTer Joe to explain how Hispanic people are diverse and it’s only black people who are all the same.

David Begley said...

Tweet that there were peaceful protests outside Lindsay Graham’s house last night. The RBG riots are beginning.

wendybar said...

They will attack ANYBODY Trump nominates because they have an agenda. They are schmucks and we all know it. They all need to go.

Ann Althouse said...

"is presented as a novel revelation"

It's not presented as a novel revelation, so your rudeness is particularly ugly. I said "radically exposes the problem," not "I'm just noticing this for the first time."

Try being less of an asshole.

Ann Althouse said...

I've seen affirmative action programs where Cuban-Americans were excluded from the Hispanic group that benefitted.

Wilbur said...

"Cuban food rocks"

That is the truth. Try Padrino's or Las Vegas in Broward County. If you're in Miami-Dade, try any of a thousand holes-in-the-wall in a Hialeah or Allapattah strip mall. If you want the best tourist experience, go to Versailles in Miami.

tim maguire said...

rhhardin said...With women the problem is always how long they can manage not to think like a woman. You want structure on the court, not feelings, and they'll probably only last a year or two before they revert to womanish reasoning.

Why is only male thinking allowed? The desire for "structure on the court" is too assumption-laden to make a complete answer. The reality, no matter how we dress it up, is that our decision-making is heavily influenced by what scares us most. If your view is that what scares women is different from what scares men, then the best decisions are going to be made when both views are represented.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

All procedural arguments are in bad faith, according to the sage Michael Barone. Trump will do something to shake up their plans. The Black lady in MI therefore seems more likely to get the nod this time.

RichAndSceptical said...

In 8 years, how many African American jurists did Obama nominate to Supreme Court?

Answer: 0

That should be repeated every time the left makes any argument about Trump's choice.

John henry said...

We've got a Puerto Rican-american (a/k/a American) on the court, not a latino-American. Surely there is room for a Cuban-American (a/k/a American) as well?

Not quite on topic but Id love to see pdjt come out in favor of expanding the court. Perhaps to 15.

"I'd get to name 7 more justices!"

There are pros and cons to expansion but just the idea of pdjt naming 7 more 40 year old justices would give demmies the shivering fits.

Or fivering shits como se dice en mi barrio

John Henry

chuck said...

I don't know enough to judge any of the proposed candidates' jurisprudence, but choosing Lagoa would present the Democrats with a political problem that intrigues me.

rwnutjob said...

At least they didn't say Latinix

narciso said...

sotomayor was cortez 1.0, but she had the right politics, so they had to vote for her,

Lash LaRue said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Todd said...

Two things:

a) Democrats would not mind and would actually use the "second Latina" supporting argument IF it were the "right" Latina. The wrong anybody get no quarter with Democrats.

b) MLK has got to be vomiting in his grave over what has become of his "judge by the content of his character" wish.

hawkeyedjb said...

I'm looking forward to hearing the lurid fantasies put forth in opposition to the candidate. We've had sexual harassment, rape... For the Cuban woman, maybe it will be something involving a cigar.

David Begley said...

We should have at least one Justice who was first in her class in law school and who didn’t graduate from an Ivy.

Static Ping said...

So is this what they mean by "systemic racism"?

Steven said...

Okay, let's do this in the pure-ethnicity-percentage method that gets used when counting board seats or Google employees or whatever.

Hispanics (the poll-preferred self-designation, as opposed to Latino/a or Latinx, which are disfavored) are 16.7% of the US population. One of nine is only 11.1%, under-representation by 5.6 percentage points. Two of nine is 22.2%, over-representation by 5.5 percentage points.

So, given the limitation of nine seats, two Hispanics is very slightly more accurate than one. Further, given population growth trends, the Hispanic percentage is going to increase, and so in ten and twenty years 2-of-9 will be even closer to the Hispanic share of the US population.

Accordingly, we need a second Hispanic on the court. And as women are underrepresented (2 of 8 at the moment), we also clearly need a woman, too. Intersectionality demands a Hispanic woman like Barbara Lagoa!

Howard said...

It's the Jewesses SCOTUS seat, no? Shirley there is a suitable Republican version in that demographic if one believes in unicorns.

mezzrow said...

I can't let the Cuban food discussion get this far without mentioning Terasita's on Columbus Av. in Tampa. Close enough to the airport that I know people who catch a cab on a holdover to eat there and then go back for their flight. Just go.

The "too many latinas" argument is another "cat fud in the dryer" argument. Trump's face would look appropriate on the dog hiding behind the washing machine hoping they go there.

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/570409109025452178/

Nicholas said...

Let's garner more examples of "install".

Fernandinande said...

At least they didn't say Latinix

You misspelled it, and I look forward to years of saying "la-tinks".

Krumhorn said...

It would be a brilliant move. As our hostess pointed out...Florida. And then there are Hispanic voters in general to consider. The lefties would soil their panties if they try to crap on this woman. Oh, and she presumably has a vah jay jay

- Krumhorn

Tommy Duncan said...

Why was it OK for Madison to create a police oversight structure that requires half of the members be black? That's over-representation...

And who gets to decide what counts as "black" or "hispanic"? Do we use the one-drop rule?

West Texas Intermediate Crude said...

Any information available on the content of her character?

Todd said...

Heartless Aztec said...

And as my second aside, Cuban food rocks. Try the Columbia restaurant in St Augustine off King George St.

9/21/20, 6:38 AM


You are SO right! The wife and I try to spend every other Christmas in St Augustine and have Christmas dinner at the Columbia every time we do. Fantastic restaurant, fantastic food.

Big Mike said...

We could use a wiser Latina on the Court.

@Ralph L, IMHO we never did get a wise Latina on the Court. Without an opinion from Ginsburg she can add her name to Sotomayor’s output will drop to zero.

MayBee said...

Joe Biden already explained to us that Hispanics, unlike black people, are diverse.

Temujin said...

Collectivism is the disease of our lives. It has taken over this country to the point of insanity. Ideally, we were to be a county based on individual rights, liberties, and pursuits. We killed that with slavery. But it was the goal, ultimately. This is barely acknowledged overall and not acknowledged at all from the left. To sit and count the number of Latinas or Black men or women, or Whites, asians, etc. is a pursuit of mediocrity.

The goal should be to get the best jurists on the court. I don't care if there are 9 Black women on the court, if they're among the best thinkers of our time and understand the Constitution is what it is, the law of the land as written. Any other standard is absurd and will guarantee that the Supreme Court will, in time, become as effective as our journalists currently are. When you hire by gender or color, with little regard to actual ability, you are destroying the very entity which you claim to treasure.

Michael K said...

Ann Althouse said...
I've seen affirmative action programs where Cuban-Americans were excluded from the Hispanic group that benefitted.


One of my surgical partners was born in Cuba. His parents got him out but were unable to follow so he spent several years in an orphanage until they could escape. He applied to UC medical school and waited months with no response to inquiry. Finally he drove to SF and went to the admission office. They told him his application was in the "Hispanic Committee." He asked if it could just be considered with the white applicants. It was and he was accepted two weeks later.

FleetUSA said...

Lagoa sounds great and outfoxes all the Dims

Darkisland said...

Statehood vs Commonwealth (status quo) vs independence is the bane of Puerto Rican politics. It is a swamp into which wise men and women enter not. It is the sole reason and political platform of our 3 political parties.

I found it interesting that the demmies would venture into this swamp "threatening" statehood for Puerto Rico as "retaliation" if PDJT exercises his constitutional duty.

A lot of Puerto Ricans and Nyoricans (People of Puerto Rican descent living in the upper 50) would be happy to have a candidate promise statehood. A lot of others would be upset and dismayed. Particularly because statehood has never gained a majority in all the referenda we've held on it. Nor has commonwealth. And independence can't even get into double digits.

I think even people who favor statehood would be dismayed to have this used as a weapon to punish repos.

I really don't know how this will shake out in effecting the election. I do know that I find it offensive and insulting as Hell.

John Henry

Curious George said...

"RichAndSceptical said...
In 8 years, how many African American jurists did Obama nominate to Supreme Court?"

He had the black vote.

Yancey Ward said...

John Henry wrote:

"Not quite on topic but Id love to see pdjt come out in favor of expanding the court. Perhaps to 15.j"

It would be hilarious to watch the Democrat media spin on a dime to oppose such a plan.

tcrosse said...

It's dangerous, and it should go horribly wrong.

Especially in Florida.

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

"I'll be very interested to see if Democrats unleash the "second Latina" argument."

They couldn't be that stupid.... I'm kidding, of course.

I'm guessing Lagoa will be the pick and the ACB hype is a head fake. What's the downside of making the Democrats spend a couple of weeks attacking Hispanics? As for diversity, what does nominating a Black judge (who isn't Clarence Thomas) get anybody at this point?

Ice Nine said...

Yeah, there would be two Latinas, but if Trump gets a Lagoa nomination confirmed, we'll finally have a wise Latina on the Supreme Court.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

The Left would instantly label Lagoa a white Hispanic.

Unknown said...

We are to prefer

La Tinx

Rhymes with stinks

Sam L. said...

It's just the WaPoo, WaPooping.

hombre said...

Barbara Lagoa is a good choice, if she is a legitimate conservative. The mediaswine and the Democrats will have some bullshit objection to anyone, but “second Latina” and the bigoted anti-Catholic opposition to Amy Barrett truly emphasize how low they have fallen.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Ann,

I've seen affirmative action programs where Cuban-Americans were excluded from the Hispanic group that benefitted.

So have I. Pretended argument: The Cubans who fled Castro were "really" just rich white people defending "their" property, anyway. Actual argument: Cuban-Americans have some excellent first-hand experience of socialism, and aren't interested in Version 2.0 here. (Anent the first argument, it's true that a lot of Cubans who fled were lighter-skinned and more "aristocratic" than many who stayed. But you can say the same of many American immigrants from any and every Spanish-speaking nation in the Americas. I had, e.g., a grad school colleague from Mexico who was exceedingly upper-class in manners and mores, and also very light-skinned. Yet she was as Mexican as anyone else from that nation.)

Biff said...

After consulting my Lefty Decoder Ring, my understanding is that Cubans who are not on the political Left are, by definition, white (regardless of their actual skin color), and they absolutely are not Latina, Latino, Latinx, or Hispanic.

khematite said...

Sotomayor wasn't the first Hispanic on the US SUpreme Court; that would be Benjamin Cardozo, way back in 1932. Of course, he did take at least a bit of flak for becoming the second Jew on the Court, and not even having the decency to succeed the first, Louis Brandeis, but instead serving together with him from 1932-1938. At the time, that gave Jews 22% of the seats on the Supreme Court, even though they constituted only 3% of the US population.

Not to mention that Cardozo's appointment resulted in (horror of horrors!) three New Yorkers serving simultaneously. Of course, more recently, that was outdone when every NYC borough except for Staten Island had its very own SC justice (Ginsburg of Brooklyn, Scalia of Queens, Sotomayor of the Bronx, and Kagan of Manhattan).

But even with two Jews on the Court from 1932-1938, there was still some diversity, given that Brandeis was Ashkenazic, while Cardozo was Sephardic.

BrianE said...

Proportionally, Hispanics should have two justices on the Supreme Court, since they make up 18% of the population, but are a fast growing group. Sorry Blacks, but you have your quota.

madAsHell said...

Maybe replace, and install are part of the vocabulary in the new narrative. Like intersectionality was in 2016.

You will soon be hearing these words on your local news broadcast after they've been test marketed.

/let-me-adjust-my-tin-foil-hat

Skeptical Voter said...

You know the problem with putting a second Latina on the court (even if she proves to be the first "wise" Latina) is that you take up a slot that was or should be reserved for a member of the LGBTQQ class. So no! to the second Latinx. (And yes that Latinx spelling was intentional--I'm as woke as the next guy.) Sarc,

Drago said...

West Texas Intermediate Crude: "Any information available on the content of her character?"

It just so happens, her belief system is fairly well explained by the estimable Robert Barnes during his weekly Viva Frei discussion with Canadian Attorney and observer of all things legal and political David Freiheit.

Barnes also goes into why he is not sold on Barrett (spoiler: things she is really of the corporate/Roberts mold and Barrett is one of those legal types who will always defer to prosecutors and large corporate interests as well as went along with the lockdown rules) and he also discusses a few other candidates but, in the end, Barnes believes Lagoa is tailor-made for this moment on the merits and she just so happens to have some other aspects of her life which make it difficult for dems to vote no if she were the nominee. Blue collar upbringing, a fighter, not afraid to take on entrenched establishment uniparty interests, etc. Barnes thinks her over a decade record shows strong civil and religious liberty inclinations which will be important against the democraticals/LLR-lefties desires to give the state ever greater control over the people.

Listen in from about 27 minutes in to about the 1 hour 20 min mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSKAf3d8_LY&t=218s

Skeptical Voter said...

You know the problem with putting a second Latina on the court (even if she proves to be the first "wise" Latina) is that you take up a slot that was or should be reserved for a member of the LGBTQQ class. So no! to the second Latinx. (And yes that Latinx spelling was intentional--I'm as woke as the next guy.) Sarc,

Drago said...

hombre: "Barbara Lagoa is a good choice, if she is a legitimate conservative."

See my link to the Robert Barnes discussion on Viva Frei in a previous post.

Leora said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jupiter said...

'The "first Latina" is Sonia Sotomayor, who was born in the Bronx to parents who were born in Puerto Rico.'

Also known, at least to herself, as the "wise Latina". Because she is an AA appointment, and is dumber than a box of rocks. Dumb rocks. So Lagoa would be the "smart Latina". Surely we could use one of those on the Court. Maybe she could explain what's going on to Sotomayor, who doesn't seem to grasp that she is supposed to at least pretend to be dispassionate about the matters brought before her.

Sebastian said...

"The "second Latina" argument radically exposes the problem with choosing people because of their ethnicity. You're saying just get one and then you've covered that group and you don't need another."

It's a problem only if you care about logic and consistency. Progs, by contrast, care about results, whatever result suits them in any particular situation. So if a second Latina helps, OK; if not, terrible. Their arguments, like their ethics, are situational.

It's nice that there are still some nice women who take issue with the radical problems of ordinary prog reasoning, but it is also beside the point. They'll argue whatever they damn well please, bourgeois sensibilities be damned.

narciso said...

latin american in miami proper, is the tops, the carreta (the wheel is a close second) if you want take out, 'el palacio de los jugos' the juice palace, is at the top of the heap.

mockturtle said...

Well, you know Joe has said that, unlike blacks, Hispanics are diverse. So, yeah, it would be OK to nominate her.

mockturtle said...

Remember when former Interior Secretary James Watt proudly proclaimed about cabinet appointees: “We have every kind of mix you can have. I have a black, I have a woman, two Jews and a cripple.”

BothSidesNow said...

The lack of genuine diversity of experience on the Supreme Court is a scandal. All Harvard and Yale graduates. Most went from law school to a big law firm or the DOJ and then to a circuit court and then to the Supreme Court, some stopping off in the academy for a time. Very little interaction with state governments, private business, or religious organizations. Never ran for or held an elected office, so never had to cater (or pretend to cater) to real people with real (albeit annoying) problems. In other words, carefully divorced from any actual engagement in American life. It was not always that way. The sitting justices are quintessential bureaucrats, bureaucrats in robes. Judge Lagoa, at least, went to college in a Florida state college, and sat on the Florida Supreme Court, which indicates some engagement with state politics. Forget her ethnic background, just her life experience adds some diversity to the current crop of cloistered mandarins.

Scott said...

Barbara Lagoa got her JD from Columbia, which is an Ivy. Amy Coney Barrett got hers from Notre Dame, which is not. Based on that alone, does that give Lagoa an advantage, or not, or does it make a difference?

John henry said...

But if it is "La" Tinx, that would mean female. We'd need to have an "el" tinx too.

We might as well just stick with el hombre and la mujer.

And I'm still waiting for someone who is more woke than me to explain how articles work with latinx. Is it un, el, los latinx or or una, la, las?

Someone needs to invent a gender neutral article pronto.

John Henry



Blogger Unknown said...

We are to prefer

La Tinx

Rick.T. said...

Howard said...
It's the Jewesses SCOTUS seat, no? Shirley there is a suitable Republican version in that demographic if one believes in unicorns.
-----------------------
No, it isn't. And stop calling us Shirley.

n.n said...

Democrats should reconsider their legacy of diversity (i.e. color judgment).

n.n said...

As for male and female, masculine and feminine, respectively, equal in rights and complementary in Nature, the progress of objective conflation and gender confusion stems from indulging liberal license and diversity dogma under the Pro-Choice quasi-religion ("ethics").

Bunkypotatohead said...

We need a thin, conservative latina to balance out the fat, liberal one.

n.n said...

"We have every kind of mix you can have. I have a black, I have a woman, two Jews and a cripple.”

Where there are people there is color. Where there is color there are objects. Diversity dogma is a progressive conception indulged with liberal license.

Bilwick said...

I thought I spotted the second Latina up on the grassy knoll.

This Person said...

"Try being less of an asshole."

Apologies. I will try. I'll leave aside the question of whether it's more of an asshole move to opine that the original take is a day late and a dollar short, or to flat out call someone an asshole.

Instead, I'll just take issue with your claim that "the problem" that is "radically expose[d]" is that the second Latina argument "limits opportunities for those in the groups that [the left has] posed as caring about."

With all due respect [too much?], that's not big the problem. The big problem is that a system of justifying who should or shouldn't be awarded with hard earned promotions or other benefits on the basis of how well the candidates have chosen their ancestors or chromosomes is unfair to all individuals, is arbitrary (particularly given the views on gender of those who do it), and ultimately will be ruinous for us all if allowed to continue indefinitely.

The reason for the snide comment was that this seems to have been lost on you based on your original post, which appears to recognize the problem only vis a vis its potential impact on preferred groups.

I hope this response clears the civility threshold here.

RobinGoodfellow said...

Blogger Krumhorn said...
It would be a brilliant move. As our hostess pointed out...Florida. And then there are Hispanic voters in general to consider. The lefties would soil their panties if they try to crap on this woman. Oh, and she presumably has a vah jay jay


Don’t they pronounce it vah hay hay?

ken in tx said...

For affirmative action purposes, Hispanic is a euphemism for mestizo. Spanish speaking people who are not mestizo are frequently denied membership. I don't think Ricky Ricardo would have been admitted to the Hispanic club.