(March 26, 2022 at 6:25 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Does anyone have any opinion about the supreme court nominee declining to define the word woman because she's not a biologist?
That's what arguments are for. It's no more the place of a supreme court justice, or any justice for that matter, to stake out a position on a controversial subject ahead of the matter coming before them. From what I recall other judges have declined to state how they would rule on abortion or religious freedom. I see this as no different. My only problem with it is that framing her deferral as she did was not particularly artful given how well she addressed other controversial subjects.