Thread: Obama chooses Judge Sonia Sotomayor-will she be fair?

Besides that comment that has tones of racism in it:

She has said that cities can ban guns
She has had several rulings overturned...one of her rulings is now in the Supreme Court regarding the firefighters and reverse discrimination
She does/advocates policy legislation from the bench

Supreme Couort Justices are there for life, and their job is to intrepret the intent of the Constitution and laws

Extremely troubling nomination.

The media has already been beating up on this all day, which I am sure the administration and Sotomayor are well aware of. The Senate will rake her over the coals a few times, before they confirm or reject her appointment, and I will cancel everything to watch those hearings.
Actually, I agree with Jack58's post:

I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group.

There are no automatons or new versions of the HAL 5000 computers on the Supreme Court, so of course they will bring life experiences with them in interpreting the Constitutional laws in various cases.
What bothers me is that some members of the court are looking at rulings by the International Court. This will make me absolutely go on a verbal tirade like few on the Senate committee have heard.

Originally Posted by JohnB2012

Sonia Sotomayor is a member of NCLR

http://www.abanet.org/publiced/hispanic_s.html

In addition to her work on the bench, Judge Sotomayor is an adjunct professor at New York University School of Law and a lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School. She is a member of the American Bar Association, the New York Women’s Bar Association, the Puerto Rican Bar Association, the Hispanic National Bar Association, the Association of Judges of Hispanic Heritage, and the National Council of La Raza. She has received many honors including, most recently, an award from the National Association of Women Lawyers.

Folks, please call your senators and rep about this today.

Find your senators and reps: http://www.senate.gov/ and http://www.house.gov/

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court

By Stephen Dinan (Contact) | Wednesday, May 27, 2009

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

But opponents have an uphill battle.

Judge Sotomayor already has been confirmed for the federal bench twice: unanimously in 1992, when President George H.W. Bush nominated her to a district court, and by a vote of 67-29 in 1998, after President Clinton nominated her to the appeals court. Seven Republicans who voted for her in 1997 are still in the Senate, and White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said "they're certainly well positioned to support her again."

Mr. Gibbs dismissed questions about Judge Sotomayor's reversal rate, saying she wrote 380 majority opinions during her 11 years on the appeals court. Of those 380 opinions, the Supreme Court heard five of the cases and overturned her on three.

"The totality of the record is one that's more important to look at, rather than, like I said, some out-of-context or clipped way of looking at it," Mr. Gibbs said.

While Democratic senators were quick to back Judge Sotomayor, Republicans took a wait-and-see approach, saying they will judge her by her answers at her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Still, Republicans will be under pressure from conservative and libertarian activist groups, who say the questions are mounting. The activists are looking forward to the Supreme Court's expected ruling next month in the Ricci case on race-based employment promotions.

Court watchers predict a majority of justices will rule in favor of New Haven, Conn., firefighters who said the city discriminated against them after it tested them for promotions, then scrapped the results after it realized a disproportionate number of whites would be promoted. Judge Sotomayor was part of a unanimous three-judge panel that issued an unsigned opinion ruling against the firefighters and in favor of the city.

Court watchers predict a majority of justices will rule in favor of New Haven, Conn., firefighters who said the city discriminated against them after it tested them for promotions, then scrapped the results after it realized a disproportionate number of whites would be promoted. Judge Sotomayor was part of a unanimous three-judge panel that issued an unsigned opinion ruling against the firefighters and in favor of the city.

"Given the way she recently all but dismissed the Ricci case ... and the expectation, based on oral argument, that the Supreme Court will reverse the 2nd Circuit decision, there will likely be an extremely contentious confirmation battle ahead," said Roger Pilon, vice president for legal affairs at the Cato Institute. "If confirmation hearings are scheduled for summer, they will follow shortly upon the Courts decision in that explosive case."

The White House was cognizant of the danger that case could present. An administration official, briefing reporters after the announcement, said Judge Sotomayor was not specifically asked about the case since it may come back before the Supreme Court with her as a member.

But the official said Judge Sotomayor's reading of the law in the case was well founded and defendable.

"It was a unanimous decision by the panel that she sat on, it applied 2nd Circuit law very faithfully and did rely upon what was a very thoughtful, well-written district court opinion and adopted that opinion," the administration official said. The White House refused to allow the official to be quoted by name.

Maybe more so than her judicial rulings, Judge Sotomayor can expect to be asked about her temperament as a judge and about her remarks during speeches and conferences.

The Almanac of the Federal Judiciary lists a series of quotes from lawyers praising her legal ability, but she also drew barbs from lawyers who said she is abusive in the courtroom: "She really lacks judicial temperament," one lawyer told the publication.

In 2002, in a speech in California, Judge Sotomayor said race or sex does affect a judge's rulings, and said because of that, a minority woman is a better decider than a white man: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasnt lived that life."

Three years later, at a panel discussion at Duke Law School, she seemed to endorse judicial activism on the appeals courts, telling students considering clerkships: "Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know - I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know."

A clip of the Duke comment on YouTube has been widely accessed by conservative activists.

Mr. Gibbs said the YouTube clip does not do justice to the context of Judge Sotomayor's comments, and said her record on the courts will be her answer to critics.

"The president is very convinced that people will look at the full context of this and not rely on, as I said, a small, short, out-of-context YouTube clip, and more importantly look at the basis of her entire record. I think you come to a broader understanding of who she is and what she meant," Mr. Gibbs said.

• Kara Rowland and Tom LoBianco contributed to this report.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... dder-to-f/

Another day to make a difference, please join in!


http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-903211.html#903211

Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.

No matter how you read this, she is being racist. A white male may not have lived a Latino woman's life, but he probably has lived through things in his life equally as trying. Does she think these other judges haven't been vetted and put through the mill like she's going to be? Just the fact that this judge is a member of LaRaza which is a racist group, makes her a racist in my opinion and that should disqualify her. No supreme court judge should be a member of any group that advocates for one race.

sorry to disappoint you jack, but in my mind those comments stand
and since they are racist and sexist.. i dont appreciate it.

thats my opinion and im standing that way

The big question is why can she get away with racist and sexist statements for her acceptance speech? If it were anyone else they would not even be considered!!

Are we surprised at this selection, Obama has the Chicago mafia, ACLU, Chamber of Commerce, vice president of La Raza in the Dept. of labor and the tax cheat in Treasury, he continuously takes the advice of every special interest group, behind closed doors I might add....

It just gets worse every month...but guess what, he will probably get to replace at least Ginsburg and Stevens on the Supreme court, Ginsburg has been fighting cancer. Stevens was born in 1920 (89).

But then we have Scalia, born in 1936 (73), Breyer 1938 (71), Kennedy born 1936(73)

He is going to have the opportunity to really stack the deck for years to come...scary stuff.

I'm just so tired of it all. Here we have an OBVIOUS affirmative action pick, a woman chose only because she's a woman, AND, she's hispanic.

I'm all for an equal society, but I'm not for reverse racism, which is what this is going to usher in. It's what Obama has succeeded in ushering in his entire candidacy and presidency.

Whatever happened to an AMERICAN being appointed? All we hear is Latina woman . . . Latina woman . . . I mean -- why is this society so constantly being splintered into GROUPS??

It's reverse racism, it's the fracturing of our society -- it's absolutey dangerous and destructive to this what was supposedly, a United States.