Diversity on the Supreme Court. Really?

Sonia Sotomayor has been named to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Obama. If confirmed and sworn, she will be the third woman and second Hispanic justice. [Many sources are saying she would be the first Hispanic, but they seem to have forgotten Justice Cardozo.]

Conservative types are aghast. The have found that she might think that a Latina woman would be wiser than a white male. I doubt that she really meant that, but I cannot help but think that she would bring differing perspectives than some of the more typical nominees might.

But how much diversity will she really bring?

All of the justices are lawyers and were chosen from federal appeals courts. This seems to have become normal procedure for choosing Supreme Court nominees since the Nixon days.

I really would like a really diverse court with most of the justices being non-lawyers, people more apt to have better common sense on what is right and what is wrong.

I do not suspect that I will ever see even one such justice.

But even if we continue to have lawyers for justices, maybe we could break the stranglehold that appeals courts justices seem to have on the position. Why not somebody who has practiced law and had clients of limited means or minority heritage? Or for the wrongly imprisoned? Why not somebody who has actual legislative or administrative service as something other than a lawyer? Why not somebody from a state trial court? Or even a law school professor?

Actually, I do wish Judge Sotomayor luck in her confirmation hearings. She will indeed bring a new element to the highest court.

But it really doesn’t add much diversity.