Posted on 01/29/2022 2:33:39 AM PST by MarvinStinson
Georgetown University on Thursday condemned one of its own law professors for his "appalling" criticism of President Joe Biden's pledge to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court.
In an email to the entire law school, William Treanor, dean of the law school, said faculty member Ilya Shapiro's comments regarding Biden's pledge to base his nomination decision on race were "at odds with everything" the law school stands for and were "damaging to the culture of equity and inclusion that Georgetown Law is building every day." Treanor criticized Shapiro for using "demeaning language" that he characterized as "appalling."
Shapiro, the executive director of the Georgetown Center for the Constitution, wrote on social media on Wednesday that Biden was not going to pick the most qualified person for the Supreme Court because he pledged to pick a black woman. "Because Biden said he's [sic] only consider black women for SCOTUS, his nominee will always have an asterisk attached," Shapiro wrote. "Fitting that the Court takes up affirmative action next term."
Shapiro also said the "objectively best pick" for the vacancy would be Sri Srinivasan, who sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals. He's a "solid prog[ressive] & v[ery] smart," Shapiro said. "Even has identity politics benefit of being first Asian (Indian) American. But alas doesn't fit into latest intersectionality hierarchy so we'll get [a] lesser black woman."
Treanor in the email said Shapiro's posts amounted to a "suggestion that the best Supreme Court nominee could not be a Black woman," a mischaracterization of Shapiro's argument.
Shapiro's now-deleted tweets sparked outrage from progressive students, who asked the school to "publicly denounce" Shapiro and "reconsider the decision to hire" him.
"This tweet is antithetical to Georgetown Law's commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion," the students wrote in a petition to Georgetown faculty reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon. "Ilya Shapiro expressed bigoted views in this statement, explicitly stating that Black women are a ‘lesser' choice for a Supreme Court nomination."
Treanor's email came less than 24 hours after the petition, which has been signed by 350 students.
Treanor's statement signals to students at the law school who spoke to the Free Beacon on condition of anonymity that Shapiro is on the chopping block. The school used similar language last year prior to dismissing Sandra Sellers, a professor who was caught on tape saying that black students tend to cluster at the bottom of her classes. After students protested her comments, Treanor sent out an email condemning Sellers's "reprehensible" and "abhorrent" conduct, which he said had "no place in our educational community." The next day, Treanor announced that "Professor Sellers is no longer affiliated with Georgetown Law."
Treanor did not respond to a request for comment.
That’s the sad part of this, whomever he picks gets an asterisk whether they deserve it or not.
Also, Georgetown is, and has been for a long time, a BIG disappointment.
For Georgetown Law to publicly come out as racist without any veil of propriety is quite the wake up call. To further chastise a professor who calls out racism as something acceptable is terrifying.
Let them eat their own.
Georgetown demands racism!
What if I identified as a coal-black woman who was born in Africa? Would I trump merely dark-brown black women born in the U.S.?
She is a member of the NAACP not to mention Biden’s criteria. That should disqualify her.
Does Sandra Day O'Conner and Amy Coney Barrett get asterisks as well?
Yes they do, most of the court has them.
The epitome of double-think on display.
Let’s be diverse and inclusive while simultaneously believing skin color and gender should rule our decisions. Just. Wow.
The obvious must not be spoken. Ignore the elephant in the room; it really isn’t there.
Signed: The Wokester Mob.
The dean’s own words say that Georgetown Law School stands for racism.
That is a real problem; like the Blade Runner replicants who become self-aware, the tokens realize they are just window-dressing - and it is destructive. They know they live a lie, even when non-token co-workers play along with the charade to pretend assimilation is working.
Do you think Amy Coney Barrett has realized it yet?
Maybe - but it is harder and harder for white women to get those slots (blactivists decry their “privilege”).
Does the fact either Biden or Reagan chose or will choose a justice based on intersectionality guarantee that the chosen candidate will be less qualified? No. But does it make it more likely? Yes. If one deliberately chooses to exclude a large pool of candidates, namely, of men (for Reagan) and of women of all races except black, and men of every race (for Biden), there is a probability that a superior candidate exists but will be excluded. The probability increases the larger the excluded pool becomes, and becomes a near-certainty as the still-eligible pool shrinks to just a few people.
The only way to be sure that one appoints the most-qualified candidate is to consider the qualifications of every single candidate, with no arbitrary exclusions.
Unless, of course, your “qualifications” include who they are - i.e. you want “a nation of men, not of laws”. (Again, apologies to feminists.) Then, and only then, you appoint people based on who they are, rather than how qualified they are or how they will rule.
Georgetown’s diversity, equity, inclusion program results in the liberal to conservative professor ratio to be maybe 10-15 to 1?
“The only way to be sure that one appoints the most-qualified candidate is to consider the qualifications of every single candidate, with no arbitrary exclusions.”
So what you are saying that it is impossible for a woman or a minority to ever be a superior candidate to a white male? What sets that criteria? The only way to be sure that one appoints the most-qualified candidate is to consider the qualifications of every single candidate, with no arbitrary exclusions.
What makes a single candidate the most qualified?
Unless, of course, your “qualifications” include who they are -
Like yours do?
Remind me of why “Georgetown” is considered.
Their eating their own, in this case, is telling.
Wokeness is a sad thing to witness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.