By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Private Policy and Terms of Use.
Out Trump ally Richard Grenell is making a disingenuous argument in the wake of Ketanji Brown Jackson's confirmation.
Richard Grenell, a gay conservative who worked in Donald Trump's administration, is objecting to President Joe Biden's choice of Ketanji Brown Jackson for the Supreme Court because, Grenell tweeted, "Hispanics, Asians, Whites, gays and men were not even considered."
Jackson, confirmed Thursday by the Senate, will be the first Black woman on the court. Biden fulfilled a campaign promise to name a Black woman. She will be only the sixth woman and third Black person to be a Supreme Court justice.
There are plenty of things wrong with Grenell's argument. As almost every Supreme Court justice in the nation's history has been a white man, white men are hardly underrepresented. There is already a Hispanic justice, Sonia Sotomayor. Grenell has no way of knowing if some of the Black women Biden considered had some Hispanic, Asian, or white ancestry, or were members of the LGBTQ+ community. And wouldn't commit to naming a gay justice or an Asian or Hispanic one be the same type of "identity politics" that conservatives decried in Biden's choice of a Black woman?
Numerous Twitter users took Grenell to task.
One Twitter user wrote, "Fact: Since the Supreme Court was established in 1789, 114 justices have served on the bench. Of those, 108 have been White men. Fiction: Your argument."
Another user posted, "The Court should represent all Americans. And we've probably already had a (few) gay Justices, [to be honest]."
And yet another user wrote: "You know what is even a worse precedent? It's when Mitch McConnell decided to not even consider a duly nominated judge for the court. Years later he changed his justification to rush through another nominee. He has forever politicized a process that shouldn't be."
To some tweets by prominent figures, who are people of color, Grenell responded to them by saying they were defending racism and sexism.
\u201c@RichardGrenell So every Judge up until Sandra Day-O\u2019Conner should have an asterisk because not every American was considered for the position.\u201d— James Bradley (@James Bradley) 1649363639
\u201c@RichardGrenell Fact: Since the Supreme Court was established in 1789, 114 justices have served on the bench.\nOf those, 108 have been White men. \n\nFiction: Your argument.\u201d— Regina Mack (@Regina Mack) 1649363975
\u201c@ReginaMcMullen7 @RichardGrenell Amen.\nThis was not a precedent. \nCandidate pool has been restricted for hundreds of years.\nFor the first 178 years of SCOTUS (77% of its existence), only white men were considered. \nFor the first 204 years (88% of the existence of SCOTUS), only men were considered.\u201d— Regina Mack (@Regina Mack) 1649363975
\u201c@RichardGrenell JUSTICE Ketanji Brown Jackson is eminently qualified. The Court should represent all Americans. And we've probably already had a (few) gay Justices, tbh...\u201d— FirstAlto (@FirstAlto) 1649364403
\u201c@RichardGrenell There's currently a Black man, an Hispanic woman, a White woman, and White men on the bench. Having a Black woman is a step toward a better representation of American society.\u201d— David Moyer (@David Moyer) 1649365164
\u201c@RichardGrenell There are 108 seats on the Supreme Court with an asterisk - because not every American was considered to fill it. \n\nHispanics, Asians, Blacks, Native Americans, gays and women were not even considered.\n\nThat was a terrible precedent.\u201d— Imagine spending $44B for some dick pics (@Imagine spending $44B for some dick pics) 1649368046
\u201c@RichardGrenell Sometimes you have to make up for a mistake--in this case, about 200 years of never considering anyone BUT a white man. During his campaign Reagan announced he would choose a woman for the SC. So he set the precedent.\u201d— Susan (@Susan) 1649369030
Viral post saying Republicans 'have two daddies now' has MAGA hot and bothered