Should big-boned (OK, overweight) female judges be unappointable to the land's highest court? While I'd privately have no objections to seeing a brainy, svelte babe/MILF/fox giving Scalia a run for his money, I didn't know that the question was even a legitimate (let alone important) topic of discussion until I read this.
Actually, the most salient passage in the Daily Beast article fails to discuss body fat at all, but it does show that the Supremes don't necessarily spend their days discussing weighty (sorry) judicial issues. Sometimes they're moved to officially debate the preferred muted shade of a woman's skirt, and write patronizing letters to ladies who fall short.
Beth Brinkmann has argued more than 20 cases before the Supreme Court — more than any other woman — but in 1996 her membership in the exclusive club of SCOTUS advocates was nearly revoked, after she committed a serious professional blunder. Did she cite an overruled case? Fail to mention an on-point precedent? Freeze up under the relentless questioning of the justices? No, she wore a brown skirt suit.
At the time, Brinkmann worked in the solicitor general's office, and her boss, Walter Dellinger, received a letter from then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Apparently, the justices had held a conference on the matter, and concluded that brown was not a suitable color for an advocate's skirt suit.
At the time, Brinkmann worked in the solicitor general's office, and her boss, Walter Dellinger, received a letter from then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Apparently, the justices had held a conference on the matter, and concluded that brown was not a suitable color for an advocate's skirt suit.
What in the name of FUCK?!
D.C. needs to be carpet bombed, it's useless.
Posted by: Loba | Saturday, July 11, 2009 at 03:17 PM