"There can't be that many potential choices if he's got the type of person narrowed down like that. Who are the under-60 black female federal judges appointed by Democratic Presidents? Won't they all be influenced in their decisions — reason #1, [below] — even though their names are not on a list? Aren't they all just as vulnerable to 'unrelenting political attacks' as the individuals on Trump's list (reason #2)? And are you not violating reason #3 by making this pledge? You are trying to gain favor in a partisan election campaign, and when it's over, you'll be locked into that limitation and not able to make the sober, nonpolitical analysis you want us to think you will make. And isn't your pledge to appoint a black woman — just a black woman, not the person with the greatest skill and integrity — more political than Trump's list of real people, whose skill and integrity we can investigate?"
I blogged on September 20, 2020, after Biden gave 3 reasons why he would not, like Trump, give voters a list from which he'd choose his Supreme Court nominees.
The 3 reasons were:
1. "[P]utting a judge’s name on a list like that could influence that person’s decision making as a judge, and that would be wrong, or at least create the perception that it would have influence."
2. "[A]nyone put on a list like that under these circumstances will be subject to unrelenting political attacks."
3. "[I]f I win, I’ll make my choice for the Supreme Court not based on a partisan election campaign, but on what prior presidents have done.... [A]fter consulting Democrats and Republicans in the United States Senate and seeking their advice and asking for the consent... ... I’ll consult with senators in both parties about that pick, as well as the legal and civil leaders in our country...."