SKARDAVNELNATE posted... The biological term is female. So if the term "woman" is determined by biology then the definition is adult human female. However, if the term "woman" as it refers to gender is a social construct then it has nothing to do with biology. The definition would be a person who identifies as a woman.
For any laws that uses the word "woman", as a judge, she should be able to discern which individuals in a case before her that law is referring to.
If the term "woman" is defined by biologists then, as a judge, she should know the definition. And should be able to provide it.
If the term "woman" is defined by the law then, as a judge, she should know the specific law. And should be able to provide it.
If the term "woman" is defined by society then, as a judge which is an elected position, she should know the values of the community she serves. And should be able to describe that in her answer.
Instead she evaded the question and failed to give any insight into how she would make a decision on an issue dealing with the subject. That is a problem because, as a judge, she is required to make decisions that are consistent with the applicable laws and give compelling reasoning which demonstrates she has done that.
As a judge giving a non-answer should not be acceptable to the people she expected to preside over.
I see this more of a problem with the US Judicial system... everyone afraid of the political consequences of being wrong, which is painfully reinforced by precedential reliance