(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Demographic Contrasts, Legislative and Judicial [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.'] Date: 2024-06-10 It is reasonable to maintain that the composition of governing bodies should bear some resemblance to that of the governed constituents. Of course it is well known that that is not the case in our country. But there is one disparity that I find striking and not widely acknowledged. With data taken from the internet (numbers may vary slightly, depending on the source) I would like to compare the U.S. population to members of Congress and the Supreme Court with regard to race, gender and religious affiliation. ___________________________________________________________________________________ U.S. population members of Congress SCOTUS white 59% 75% 67% RACE nonwhite 41% 25% 33% (Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc.) ___________________________________________________________________________________ male 49.5% 72% 56% GENDER female 50.5% 28% 44% ___________________________________________________________________________________ Catholic 21% 30% 67% RELIGIOUS Protestant or 50% 58% 22% other Christian AFFILIATION nonChristian (Jewish, Muslim, 6% 8% 11% Buddhist, etc.) unaffiliated or 23% 4% not responding ___________________________________________________________________________________ Looking at the overall picture, it appears that SCOTUS more closely approaches the general population in gender and race distribution. However, when we we look at religious affiliation, the difference is most remarkable. Members of Congress come fairly close to the same pattern as the U.S. population, except for the unaffiliated. But while half of U.S. citizens identify as Protestant or other Christian, and one out of five identify as Catholic, two thirds of SCOTUS are Catholic, and less than one fourth are Protestant. This is not an inconsequential matter, such what is your favorite color or what football team do you favor. While one’s religious preference should not impact a government official’s political activity, it does in fact happen, even more so now than ever before. When JFK ran for president, his being Catholic was a significant issue. He stated, “I do not speak for my church on public matters, and the church does not speak for me.” He was elected and pretty much kept to his promise. Members of the Supreme Court have made no such promise, and the Gang of Six have made it clear that they have no intention of doing so. While I have very little use for organized religion in general, the two entities for which I have the greatest disdain are the Baptist and Catholic churches. Aside from their hypocrisy and the huge amount of evil done by them as institutions, their biggest danger is their contempt for a secular government and the separation of church and state. Barry Goldwater had the religious fanatics pegged right decades ago when he said, “Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.” SCOTUS seems determined to turn America into Gilead and constitutes an existential threat to our democracy with its patently insane decisions, such as corporations are people, money is speech, a lone heavily-armed unaffiliated lunatic is a well regulated militia, women are second-class citizens, and racial discrimination is no longer a problem, to name just a few. The danger from this body that we face is compounded by the fact that it has lifetime appointments and is answerable to no one. Incorrigible is a word often used for unruly children, but it is the most apt term to apply to SCOTUS. It is beyond correction. Impeachment and ethics reform are spitting in the wind. Expansion of the Court seems like a fix, and some have suggested 13 as a good number. But if one does the math, to dilute out the dominionists to 20%, we would need 30 on the Court. That is not likely to happen, but some drastic change is needed. Expansion of the court may be the most practical solution, but it will require Democratic control of the House, Senate and White House, as well as the development of a backbone by the Democratic Party, a feature that it has been notoriously lacking for far too long. And impeachment should not be completely off the table, considering the fact that several on the Court lied through their teeth in their confirmation hearings. P.S.: I am not suggesting a demographic quota to match the U.S. population. When asked how many of the nine judges on the US Supreme Court should be female — and at what point there would be enough women on the bench, Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a simple answer: "When there are nine.” "Nine men was a satisfactory number until 1981.” I totally agree with her. If we had nine women on the bench, we would reduce the number of sexual predators by at least two. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/6/10/2245804/-Demographic-Contrasts-Legislative-and-Judicial?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/