We all admire the Founding Fathers for the wisdom and foresight they exercised as they laid down the Constitution and the basic rights that, after two centuries, still define political governance in the U.S. Yet, this system of governance has started to produce outcomes that leave large swaths of U.S. citizens to feel less represented in the various branches of the state.
The Senate over-represents states sparsely populated and under-represents heavily populated states, like California and New York. The rather moderate differences in population across the founding states that existed at the birth of the Republic have by now become huge. California’s almost 40 million population is 40 times larger than Montana’s 1 million. And yet each state sends two senators to Congress.
Since the electoral votes are the sum of the 435 House seats plus the 100 Senate seats, this also skews the electoral congress in favor of less populous states. No surprise then that it is possible to elect as president the candidate that wins the majority of electoral votes but not the majority of nation-wide votes, as it happened in 2000 and 2016.
The Supreme Court has always been a non-representative body from many standpoints. Prior to the 20th century the appointment of Catholic jurists was rare in the other-wise Protestant, male and white Court. The 20th century saw a significant trend toward greater representativeness with the appointment of more Catholics, and for the first time Jewish-Americans, one African-American, and women, all at the expense of Protestant jurists. The current Supreme Court of eight (excluding Kennedy), consists of 5 men and 3 women of which 4 are Catholic, 3 are Jewish and 1 is Protestant (but raised as Catholic – Neil Gorsuch). With the likely appointment of Brett Kavanaugh, the number of Catholics will go again up to 5 and that of Christian-affiliated jurists to 6.
Beyond the obvious gender gap, this demographic breakdown is out of sync with present U.S. demographics in relation to religious affiliation. A survey conducted by Pew Research and cited in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal of Sept. 10, 2018 (“Nonbelievers Seek Increased Political Power”) reveals that by religious affiliation, the U.S. adult population breaks down to about 25% Evangelicals, 21% Catholics, 14% Mainline Protestants, 16% Non-Christians (i.e., Jewish, Muslims, Hindus, others) and 24% Unaffiliated (i.e., atheists, agnostics, and non-denominationals). Even more important is the trend in these groups. Whereas the share of all three Christian groups has declined between 2000 and 2014, the share of Unaffiliated has increased by 10% and that of Non-Christians by about 2%.
Related to this growing discrepancy between the composition of the Supreme Court and the general population is the following article posted on CNN: How Brett Kavanaugh will collide with a changing America
CNN Politics. Read the full story
In an ideal world, candidates for the SC would be selected on the basis of their legal knowledge, experience, and objectivity. Instead, appointments to the SC have reflected, in the distant past, protestant bias against other religious or ethnic groups, and since Roe v. Wade the opposing views about abortion and, more recently, gay rights. From the Republican side this leads to a preference for candidates with known religious bona fides and affiliation with denominations that stand opposed to abortion and gay rights and who are likely to favor religious over secular rights.
At the same time, we are witnessing an intensifying and systematic effort by the Christian right (spearheaded by Evangelicals) to erode the separation between church and state established by the First Amendment. The nomination of one more candidate, like Brett Kavanaugh, who has undeniable strong religious affiliation and feelings, cannot, therefore, meet the rights to representation of those who are part of the 24% of Unaffiliated and the 16% of non-Christian U.S. citizens. Nor can it meet the views of religious Americans, who, nonetheless, support the separation of church and state. Although it is premature to say how judge Kavanaugh will decide on the above issues, his religious credentials are such that raise justifiable concerns among secular Americans.
Given the life appointments to the SC, it follows that any future realignment of the composition of the SC will lag many years – most likely a whole generation – before currently less-represented or unrepresented segments of Americans find their voice in the Supreme Court.
Let's Reason 
George, I liked this blog a lot. It is very pertinent on a cricial and timely issue.
LikeLike