Article Title
Abstract
This review uses Carter's two foci as a springboard for analyzing the Article II, Section II appointment process. First, Carter's discussion of indecency in modern appointments may be a valuable theoretical insight into the process instead of a mere sociological observation. "Indecency" in appointments, or what is known as "borking" in Carter parlance, may also be a symptom of race and gender bias in the administration of the Article II, Section II power. To ameliorate the effects of this bias, I suggest the incorporation of pragmatism (a thread of philosophical and legal thought) and parity concepts into the existing appointments theories that have been advanced by scholars such as Carter, Laurence Tribe, and Judge Bork.
Recommended Citation
Yxta M. Murray,
Pragmatism and Parity in Appointments,
3
Mich. J. Gender & L.
11
(1995).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjgl/vol3/iss1/2
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Judges Commons, Law and Politics Commons, President/Executive Department Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons