they ve been on the bench long enough. i just direct people to think about and compare and contrast how they might be reviewed compared to, say, a sitting justice of amy coney barrett who certainly is a legal scholar in her own right, and i do not want to take away from her qualifications. but it was not a requirement that she had a lengthy tenure in appellate court. and justice elena kagan on the other side of the aisle, so to speak, never a day as a judge before becoming a supreme court justice. so i hope these women get a fair opportunity for a confirmation hearing and that we don t just continue to think about this inertia of the knee-jerk reaction that it must be a white man from a particular ivy league school who has the intellectual prowess to be one of the supreme judicial nine. guess what, you mentioned princeton. that s ivy league. so there you go. that part is it s true. that s true. yeah. that s true. and of course it s the idea that their resumes and backgrounds,
till this point to even have them nominated to this level. can we talk about that, laura? because you know a couple of women on the short list. tell us about them. i was a year behind at princeton one of them, judge candice jackson. and even then at 17 years old i can tell you that her intellectual might was apparent. and even thenna mong her peer group it was quite clear about the destiny who was before her. and justice wilhemina wright, goes by mimi wright, out of my home state of minnesota. holding the bench at the state appellate level, at the supreme court level, and now as a federal district judge. the work of sherrilyn ifill is well known in the civil rights world. and i could go on with every single person who is even on the short list singing their praises. and none of their qualifications can be questioned. yet and still i m sure you can imagine the state of affairs that people are already trying to impute something negative towards them or question whether