Yes, even surpassing Garrett Epps.
This happens to me too often. I’m writing this after less than 5 hours sleep, because I stumbled on this thing while trying to calm down after an early morning errand so I could get back to bed, and found that if I didn’t write about it, it would be like comedian Lewis Black’s story about over-hearing someone say, “If it weren’t for my horse, I wouldn’t have spent that year in college.” As with that snippet of a conversation that he couldn’t stop obsessing over what the hell it could mean for days, this article from “Above the Law” would churn and churn in my brain until it finally killed me if I didn’t get this post up.
I hope it works.
“Above the Law” is terrible—though not usually this terrible—about 95% of the time; after all, it employed perpetually furious anti-white racist Elie Mystal as its most prominent voice for years. I allow it to keep clogging my email with alerts because once in a long while the legal gossip web-tabloid finds an ethics related story that has eluded me. This, however, a post by staffer Chris Williams titled “I Think I Figured Out Biden’s Supreme Court Pick,” has me wondering whether it’s worth it.
Williams is a supposed satirist and a lawyer, and his goal in this mess is to mock critics of Biden’s Vice-President-choosing process (and didn’t THAT turn out well!) for filling the Supreme Court vacancy. He is aiming specifically at Illya Shapiro, the conservative legal scholar now hanging with his job in limbo at Georgetown Law Center because he dared to argue in a tweet that limiting the pool according to skin color and ladyparts was likely to result in less than the optimum choice for the Court, the law and the nation.
This assertion is logically evident, or should be, but Williams delivers a tortured, stunningly unfunny, obnoxious rebuttal purporting to use reasoning similar to that of Biden’s critics to reach an absurd “perfect pick.” (Spoiler: It’s Betty Boop.) Buried in the muck of his smug and incompetent satire is what Williams thinks is a valid point: because the Constitution doesn’t specify qualifications for the position of Supreme Court Justice, it is impossible to argue that any criteria will result in a less than ideally qualified nomination. Then he concludes with a paragraph that abandons any attempt at humor (which Williams might as well do since nothing that came before was remotely clever or funny), and that exposes him as a badly educated lawyer who doesn’t understand the vital cultural value of freedom of speech, not to mention the crucial educational principle of academic freedom.
His ultimate conclusion? Critics of Biden’s excluding candidates for the Court based on race and gender are racists.
You can read the article here.