ONE OBJECTION IS THAT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS SHOULD MOT MAKE ANY RACIAL CLASSIFICATIONS. THE OBJECTION IS RAISED WITH REFERENCE TO THE RACIAL LAWS OF NAZI GERMANY WHICH TREATED INDIVIDUALS ON THE BASIS OF THEIR RACIAL ATTRIBUTES AND NOT THEIR PERSONAL QUALITIES. HOWEVER, IT IS NECESSARY TO GIVE NEGATIVE CONNOTATIONS TO DELIBERATE CONSIDERATION OF RACE (AND SEX) BY THE GOVERNMENT, SO LONG AS IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT POSITIVE, ANTIRACIST, ANTISEXIST MOTIVES AND PURPOSES ARE INVOLVED. A SECOND OBJECTION IS THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION MEANS REVERSE DISCRIMINATION. AT THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL, THE REVERSE DISCRIMINATION CHARGE CAN BE TROUBLESOME, BUT NOT IN THE MATTER OF SELECTING JUDGES. JUDICIAL SELECTION HAS A LONG TRADITION OF CRITERIA NO MORE RELATED TO THE PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES THAN IS RACE OR SEX (GEOGRAPHY, PARTY AFFILIATION, PARTY ACTIVITY, ETC.). A THIRD OBJECTION IS THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS INCONSISTENT WITH MERIT SELECTION. BUT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION MAY ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE MERIT SELECTION FOCUSING THE SEARCH ON FINDING WELL-QUALIFIED WOMEN AND MINORITIES AND MIMIMIZING THE USE OF JUDGESHIPS TO REWARD POLITICAL ACTIVITIES. THE PROPORTIONS OF MINORITIES AND WOMEN IN THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES IN RESPONSE TO A FOURTH ARGUMENT: THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS UNNECESSARY AND INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE THE JUDICIAL SELECTION PROCESS IS REQUIRED TO BE NONDISCRIMINATORY. THERE HAS BEEN NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FEARS OF THOSE WHO OBJECT THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARD A SOCIETY CLOGGED WITH QUOTA SYSTEMS. THE FINAL OBJECTION TO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS THAT ONLY THE BEST (MOST QUALIFIED) PEOPLE SHOULD SIT ON THE BENCH, REGARDLESS OF THEIR RACE OR SEX, AND REGARDLESS OF THE VALIDITY OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN OTHER SPHERES OF AMERICAN LIFE. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION WILL ENSURE THAT THE 'BEST' JUDGES ARE CHOSEN FROM ALL POSSIBLE CANDIDATES. A LIST OF BLACKS, WOMEN, AND HISPANICS APPOINTED AND NOMINATED TO THE BENCH DURING THE CARTER ADMINISTRATION IS INCLUDED. (LKM)