Here's the Supreme Court before the term "diversity" became undefinable

[Mr.Mystery]

14. Yes . . . after thinking about this, it ties in with the Bernie Sander's idea that "identity

politics" should be secondary to "class struggle" . . . (I don't know if he would characterize his position that way, but that's what I see him saying.)

And I think that position is basically right.

Just because you put an Afr.-American on the Court (Thomas) or a woman (Sandra Day O'Conner or Amy Covid Barrett) or a Catholic (Alito, Scalia, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch) or a Jew (Cardozo) in no way means that they will honor the interests of their "identity" or the interests of the majority of Americans.

The Cons have played jiu-jitsu with identity politics--they replaced the towering justice-for-all figure of Thurgood Marshall with the puppet-of-the-special interests Clarence Thomas, but the Libs can't object because "he's black, you know." Same with Amy Covid Barrett, she a woman sold out women's rights practically the first thing she did on the bench. But by golly, she is a woman, heigh ho.

So the Court is diverse in gender, religion, ethnicity, race etc., but it's still packed with ONE political viewpoint.