SIGforum
For your viewing humor...Men of SCOTUS Interrupt the Women a Lot
April 10, 2017, 01:46 PM
bigdealFor your viewing humor...Men of SCOTUS Interrupt the Women a Lot
Female justices interrupted more often than men, researchers say(NEWSER) – Even if there were an equal number of male and female justices on the Supreme Court, a new study suggests the sexes wouldn't have an equal voice. Researchers at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law say female justices simply "do not have an equal opportunity to be heard" as they've been interrupted three times more often than male justices over the last 12 years, despite speaking less often. During the 2015 term, a female justice interrupted a male colleague seven times at most, per SCOTUSblog. But female justices were interrupted up to 15 times by a single male colleague. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was interrupted 15 times by Justice Anthony Kennedy, 14 times by Justice Samuel Alito, and 12 times by Chief Justice John Roberts, the study says.
Roberts, Alito, and Kennedy also interrupted Justice Elena Kagan at least 10 times each, while Kennedy interrupted Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 11 times, the researchers say. Though Kagan and Sotomayor were interrupted more often than Ginsburg, the researchers add "gender is approximately 30 times more influential than seniority." Not only do the interruptions show a lack of respect, the researchers argue, but they could have deeper implications since "oral arguments shape case outcomes," allowing justices to form opinions and persuade colleagues. The study shows that female justices "gradually learn to set aside such politeness." Researchers say awareness could help solve the issue. But over at Jezebel, they think the real solution "is for men to learn to stop being so in love with the sounds of their own voices." (Justices also encounter racism.)
Link Ok, since research now proves women aren't valued as SCOTUS judges, then the court should only be filled with male nominees. No more women on the court. See, problem solved.
-----------------------------
Guns are awesome because they shoot solid lead freedom. Every man should have several guns. And several dogs, because a man with a cat is a woman. Kurt Schlichter
April 10, 2017, 01:49 PM
TXJIMDid the study include the amount of time they usually ramble every time they open their yap? Perhaps the male justices just want to get a word in before the case is decided
______________________________
“I'd like to know why well-educated idiots keep apologizing for lazy and complaining people who think the world owes them a living.”
― John Wayne
April 10, 2017, 02:15 PM
SBrooksthe fact that all three women are liberal/not-too-bright might have something to do with it...
------------------
SBrooks
April 10, 2017, 02:27 PM
JALLEN"There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact." -- Mark Twain
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.
When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson
"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown April 10, 2017, 03:05 PM
oldRogerquote:
"There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact." -- Mark Twain
JALLEN; that is a beautiful rejoinder to this totally non-factual article.
April 10, 2017, 03:11 PM
David Leequote:
Originally posted by TXJIM:
Did the study include the amount of time they usually ramble every time they open their yap? Perhaps the male justices just want to get a word in before the case is decided
Yeah. Did someone awaken Ginsberg..
April 10, 2017, 03:12 PM
Sigmanicquote:
Though Kagan and Sotomayor were interrupted more often than Ginsburg, the researchers add "gender is approximately 30 times more influential than seniority."
I wonder if they factored in nap time for Ginsburg? This could explain the fewer interruptions.
April 10, 2017, 03:18 PM
jaaron11quote:
Originally posted by JALLEN:
"There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact." -- Mark Twain
J
Rak Chazak Amats April 10, 2017, 03:28 PM
zoom6zoomOne persons "getting interrupted" is anothers "getting them to shut the hell up"
I have my own style of humor. I call it Snarkasm. April 10, 2017, 03:39 PM
jhe888I doubt that oral argument makes much difference in Supreme Court decisions.
Honestly, it is all in the briefs, in more detail, and better supported by citations.
I wouldn't cancel oral argument, but don't fool yourself that it is all that important.
The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything. April 10, 2017, 03:47 PM
JALLENquote:
Originally posted by oldRoger:
quote:
"There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact." -- Mark Twain
JALLEN; that is a beautiful rejoinder to this totally non-factual article.
You may have gotten the idea that I am a critic of statistics, the misuse of statistics, actually, which is almost all of them attempting to describe human conduct.
67.3% of statistics are misleading, and the rest flat wrong.
BTW, Justice Thomas never interrupts or asks questions.
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.
When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson
"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown April 10, 2017, 03:49 PM
Elk HunterJust what our society needs! A study of which gender gets interrupted the most!
Somebody got toooooo much money, tooooooo much time, and not enough brain.
Elk
There has never been an occasion where a people gave up their weapons in the interest of peace that didn't end in their massacre. (Louis L'Amour)
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. "
-Thomas Jefferson
"America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." Alexis de Tocqueville
FBHO!!!
The Idaho Elk Hunter
April 10, 2017, 03:51 PM
Elk Hunterquote:
Originally posted by Sigmanic:
quote:
Though Kagan and Sotomayor were interrupted more often than Ginsburg, the researchers add "gender is approximately 30 times more influential than seniority."
I wonder if they factored in nap time for Ginsburg? This could explain the fewer interruptions.
All part of the gender war!!!!!!
Elk
There has never been an occasion where a people gave up their weapons in the interest of peace that didn't end in their massacre. (Louis L'Amour)
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. "
-Thomas Jefferson
"America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." Alexis de Tocqueville
FBHO!!!
The Idaho Elk Hunter
April 10, 2017, 03:52 PM
nhtagmember^^^
I remember hearing factoid that as well - but didn't he recently break his record of silence and ask a question during Voisine v. US
[B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC
April 10, 2017, 04:13 PM
JALLENquote:
Originally posted by nhtagmember:
^^^
I remember hearing factoid that as well - but didn't he recently break his record of silence and ask a question during Voisine v. US
It looks like he did.
quote:
Justice Clarence Thomas asked a series of questions from the Supreme Court bench during oral arguments on Monday, the first time in 10 years he has done so.
Thomas asked the attorney for the federal government at least 12 questions during the second half of Monday’s oral arguments in a gun rights case, shocking observers used to the conservative’s public silence during cases.
“Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor violation suspends a constitutional right?” Thomas asked Assistant to the Solicitor General Ilana Eisenstein, according to court transcripts.
The questions were even more notable coming after the death of fellow conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who frequently interrogated lawyers during oral arguments.
The case before the court on Monday, Stephen Voisine v. United States, centers on the convictions of two men who had been charged with domestic violence.
The court is being asked to decide whether a prior conviction of “reckless” domestic violence qualifies as a federal misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, which would bar the men from possessing firearms.
Thomas, one of the court’s four remaining conservative members, asked Eisenstein how long the suspension of the right to own a firearm is under a misdemeanor domestic violence charge.
“Your Honor, the right is suspended indefinitely,” she said.
“OK,” Thomas responded. “So can you think of a First Amendment suspension or a suspension of a First Amendment right that is permanent?”
After Eisenstein clarified that the ban in not necessarily permanent, Thomas questioned why a person would be barred from owning a firearm if a firearm had not been used in the domestic violence case.
“It is a suspension that is actually indirectly related or actually unrelated,” he said. “It’s just a family member’s involved in a misdemeanor violation; therefore, a constitutional right is suspended.”
Giving a hypothetical, he asked whether a publisher could be banned from ever publishing again if found to have recklessly used a child in an advertisement.
Eisenstein said she didn’t think the right to ever publish again could be take away, but it could be limited.
“So how is that different from suspending your Second Amendment right?” Thomas asked.
Thomas’s decision to speak up during oral arguments could signal that he intends to take a more prominent role on the court following Scalia’s death.
With Republicans vowing to block President Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia, no matter who it is, the Supreme Court could be left with only eight members until well into 2017.
Updated at 5:48 p.m.
Link
Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.
When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson
"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown April 10, 2017, 05:17 PM
jbcummingsAnd the women on SCOTUS have
never interrupted a male colleague? Never? Ever?
Of course this 'study', I'm sure, had a point of view from the beginning.
———-
Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for thou art crunchy and taste good with catsup.
April 10, 2017, 06:28 PM
DoubleAdobequote:
Originally posted by jbcummings:
And the women on SCOTUS have never interrupted a male colleague? Never? Ever?
Of course this 'study', I'm sure, had a point of view from the beginning.
And I'm sure you are correct, sir.
April 10, 2017, 06:32 PM
PatenIt says right up there in the article that the women do interrupt male justices, just not as much. Did you bother to read it?
April 10, 2017, 07:29 PM
wrightdquote:
Originally posted by SBrooks:
the fact that all three women are liberal/not-too-bright might have something to do with it...
that's what I thought. when a member of scotus says something stupid, someone else on the team should refute or question it. we can't have stupidity on the scotus, or one would hope.
Lover of the US Constitution
Wile E. Coyote School of DIY Disaster April 10, 2017, 07:32 PM
satchquote:
Originally posted by David Lee:
quote:
Originally posted by TXJIM:
Did the study include the amount of time they usually ramble every time they open their yap? Perhaps the male justices just want to get a word in before the case is decided
Yeah. Did someone awaken Ginsberg..
That's Ruth Buzzey Ginsberg.