The U.S. population is approx. 1/4 Catholic. SCOTUS is 2/3.

[trof]

Why is that?

[pnwmom]

1. And the other third is Jewish: Breyer, Kagan, and Ginsburg, despite being under 4% of population

by the most inclusive definition: practicing, non practicing, Jewish background but other religion, etc.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/jewish-population-calculator/


For some reason the protestant plurality is content with not being represented on the court.

[Fred Sanders]

6. Protestants can't crack the club and the iron grip of the Federalist Society and the Koch's.

[pnwmom]

7. There were plenty of protestants in the past. They let it go. I suspect

most of the top GOP lawyers want to be rich partners in big city law firms rather than lowly Federal judges.

[brooklynite]

15. Umm, you're aware that two Catholics were appointed by President Obama?

[Kaleva]

2. Freepers ask the same question

Many of them despise the Pope and Catholics in general.

[pnwmom]

3. They like the pro-life stance. n/t

[Kaleva]

4. They like the old school Catholics. Gays destined for Hell and all that.

[Fred Sanders]

5. Equality of religion? Or maybe not...yet they all get to judge other religions without any one

being able to add life experience perspective...e.g. ruling on the Muslim ban...

[treestar]

8. their religion does not affect the law

They have to decide the law, and their religion does not come into it.

[pnwmom]

10. I think it can color their view of the law -- especially in the case of abortion

and the right to privacy.

[treestar]

11. It could but at least they would have to come up with a legal rationale

They can't just write "I'm Catholic and think abortion is wrong, therefore I hold that it can be made illegal." At least, it has not gotten that bad yet.

[pnwmom]

12. There is a ready-made rationale for anyone with their mind made up for personal or religious

reasons: the originalist theory.

They can join the originalists who already say that there is no language in the constitution that names or protects a "right to privacy." They can say the founders never intended to put privacy-based rights in the constitution.

The right to privacy underpins the right to use contraception, to abortion, to having sex with consulting adults (including with same sex adults), to making personal medical decisions (as in the Terry Schiavo case). There is a great deal at risk in adding another originalist to the Supreme Court.

[treestar]

13. I figure the Federalist Society has already

provided the opinion they would use and the legal reasoning they would use.

The good side to the lifetime appointment is that they can decide cases however they want, regardless of who appointed them - I do wonder if the other 4 conservative justices are necessarily all wanting to over turn Roe v. Wade - it would not be easy to reason out and involves undoing 40 years of subsequent jurisprudence.

[SharonAnn]

16. They interpret the constitution, thus they interpret the law, through their lense.

Originalists, supporting slavery and misogyny?

[Tommy_Carcetti]

9. Damn Papists!

Yes, that's from this Papist.

[treestar]

19. Reminds me of the 6 Wives of Henry the VIII series

He would say things like: "Do the Papists think they are above the law?" And "It was the Papists! And they will pay for it!"

[Tommy_Carcetti]

22. .........

"And our women, let's not forget those ladies, y'all. Looking to us for protection! From darkies, from Jews, from papists, and from all those smart-ass folks say we come descended from monkeys! "

[SharonAnn]

14. Patriarchy is way over-represented

[pnwmom]

17. Only 4% of the population is Jewish, by the broadest definitions, yet 1/3 of the Supreme Court.

So the question is why no Protestants?

[Turin_C3PO]

20. Obama appointed two Catholics (I think).

I believe it’s just a coincidence.

[Turin_C3PO]

18. Not sure that

Protestants would be any different.

[Ms. Toad]

21. Because there are 9 slots, and that was who was appointed.

You could run similar comparisons for race, gender, sexual orientation.

If you are choosing a teeny tiny number of people based on quality, there is no reason to expect that those 9 will be a perfect microcosm of the whole.

I suspect the numbers would be more balanced as to religion if you looked at all of the federal judtes. I suspect it would not be as to race or gender. That is a much larger pool - so I would expect it to be closer to a microcosm of society as a whole, although the coveted federal clerkships - a stepping stone to becoming a federal judge - are still likely to be heavily male and heavily white.

[pnwmom]

23. I think it's interesting that there are no protestants in the group. n/t

[Johonny]

24. The thing is the majority of Catholic views aren't even represented by the court

Conservative Catholics prescribe to a particularly conservative view of Catholicism not in line with the average American catholic.

[Turin_C3PO]

25. Yes, most Catholics vote Democratic I believe.

So these far right clowns aren’t the majority of Catholics.

[maxsolomon]

26. Catholics and Jews get the SCOTUS

Because they don't get real power. That's for White Men.

[Hassler]

27. A very specific Catholic sub-group: Opus Dei types who worship top-down authority

[rzemanfl]

28. Maybe the same reason 4 members of the Judiciary Committee are Mormons.

Mormons are about 2% of the population.

[RhodeIslandOne]

29. I will take 9 Catholics like Sotomayor right now

Can we make that deal?

[flotsam]

30. Jesuit Education....

Also a shitload of FBI agents and other government legal types.

[eShirl]

31. because abortion