Ruth and I don’t see eye to eye on much, but I believe her point is that there is no token quota that should determine how many women sit on the bench at one time.
I’d agree with her on that for various demographics.
Saying that 9 is enough isn’t quite the same as saying no token quota should determine it. In fact, it’s the opposite. She not only has a quota, the quota is zero men. What a sexist she is.
So for Ruth, 100% reverse discrimination is optimal.
What a brain-trust... /s
If that was the point she's making, the word "enough" would be non-sequitur.
she really sounds 5 degree’s off center. That old woman cannot even stay awake during oral arguments. She doesn’t want a quota, just a good old 100% female court....sounds hinkey to me....