Thursday, May 28, 2009
Discussion Question for Chapter 2. The Constitution
President Obama has nominated Sonia Sotomayor to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court. Look at some newspaper editorials about her and do a little research about her on the Web and make up you mind as to whether she should or should not be confirmed by the Senate. Pay particular attention to what philopophy you think she will use in interpreting the Constitution (see the last three pages in the chapter). Is she a good nominee? Should she or should she not be confirmed and why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I looked at some articles about Judge Sotomayor on the New York Times website and also did a Google search and read a couple of articles on the Huffington Post. It was somewhat difficult to find articles that only focused on her record and qualifications, as most articles seem to focus on the following controversial quote from a speech she gave in 2001:
ReplyDelete"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."
To me, the first 3 words in this quote pretty much invalidate the rest of it: "I would hope" to me implies Judge Sotomayor's personal wishes, not necessarily her policy regarding issuing judgment.
Another controversial quote that most news articles seem to be quoting is from a 2005 speech:
"All of the legal defense funds out there, they are looking for people with court of appeals experience because the court of appeals is where policy is made," she said, laughing a bit through the next part: "And I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know. Okay, I know. I'm not promoting it. I'm not advocating it. I know."
The above quote seems to be causing conservatives to label Judge Sotomayor as a "judicial activist". However, an article at the Huffington Post quotes two law professors who agree that while Congress makes the law, it is indeed the job of the judicial branch to interpret the law; in doing so, policy is made.
Based on everything I could find about Judge Sotomayor, I personally see no reason why she should NOT be confirmed as Supreme Court Justice. In spite of the quotes above, I think she will be a somewhat moderate Justice with regards to the judicial philosophies outlined in the text, since in the Huffington Post article she is also quoted as saying:
"Indeed, during her 1997 confirmation hearing, Sotomayor spoke of her judicial philosophy, saying "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."
I think she will do a good job at considering all the facts. I believe she will do everything she can to uphold the Constitution first and foremost, and in cases where the law is unclear and there is no precedent, I feel that she has enough experience, both as a judge as well in personal life, to make policy that is fair and just.
Sources:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/sonia_sotomayor/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=sotomayor&st=cse
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/01/sonia-sotomayor-supreme-c_n_194470.html
-- Jessica Moore
Well researched and thoughful comments Jessica! Good point on the meaning of the word "hope." Perhaps the White House might use that to try to deflate some of the charges that are flying! You might make a good press strategist! Bob B
ReplyDeleteI personally feel that her upbringing and ethnicity should have no affect on weather or not she is confirmed. She seems to be a very respectable woman with a good fead on her shoulders.
ReplyDeleteAccording to a statement that she made in 1997:
"I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."
I believe that she will not only be a fantastic justice but that she will uphold what this country stands for based on the words of our forefathers.
She seems to have no real opnion on the hot topic of abortion; however she is very pro gay rights. The following statement is made an openly gay woman who Sotomayor served together with on then-New York Governor Mario Cuomo's advisory committee on fighting bias:
"Nobody wanted to talk to the queer person at that time," said Ettelbrick, who represented Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund. "She was the only one [on the advisory committee] who made a point to come over and introduce herself. She was totally interested [in gay civil rights issues] and supportive."
this shows to me that she is willing to accept things may be a little different and or out of the ordinary with grace and respect. These two issues are the general issues that society will look at, and as a member of society I think that she will not only be confiremd but that she will do a great job and possibly bring in a new age to the superem court.
Charles "Chip" Dowdy
According to my research on Sonia Sotomayor, I have found that her past experiences as a prosecutor, corporate litigator, member of the District Court for the Southern District of New York and member of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit well over-qualify for her possible new position on the Supreme Court. Her background also stands out as she was brought up in a Puerto Rican family and in a poor part of South Bronx. Education was very important in her family and Sotomayor was the perfect example of an ideal student. After winning a scholarship to Princeton and continuing her education there she went onto Yale law school to attain her degree. She is very experienced in the judicial system and very aware of the laws of the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteAccording to The Huffington Post, ‘Sotomayor spoke of her judicial philosophy, saying "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it”’.
I think Sotomayor is a perfect nominee for the position on the Supreme Court and should be confirmed because of her tremendous experience as well as her philosophy on the Constitution. I also believe that she will be able to interpret the Constitution fairly and act professionally about the newer policies being made and any upcoming changes within the Supreme Court.
Melanie Ellman
It is evident that she is a good candidate for the position. Her accomplishments exhibits her hard work and dedication from graduating as valedictorian of her high school to spending the majority of her career as a prosecutor, trial judge, litigator, etc.
ReplyDeleteIn the Huffington Post,the White House states:
"If confirmed for the Supreme Court, Judge Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years".
This statement is an honor and would not have been possible if she had not had the neccessary "over and beyond" experience. Being that she came from the Bronx Projects of New York and attended Princeton and Yale, she knows the many situations that happens in those types of environment. I would say she is a good nominee and I can't find one thing that would hender or prevent her chances of replacing David Souter on the Supreme Court. As far as what philosophy she will use, that is evident in the statement she said about the constitution. She states, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." This is basically saying, rules are rules and they have to be followed. Her statement seems like she would interpret the constitution under Original Intent.
--Nancy Mills
Do to her statement in 1997, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." I believe she will interpret the constitution through originalism. Growing up in the Bronx of New York gives her an additional experience that others on the supreme court may not have. She knows how life is in the lower society and may use that to make better decisionsby considering all levels of society. Because of her exprerience I believe she should be confirmed in order to bring a new view to the supreme court.
ReplyDeleteLeanne Josey
In most of the articles that i looked up about Judge Sotomayor they where all about her life struggles and how she has overcome many things. But i dont think just because you came from public housing in the South Bronx and made your way into law school that, that should necessarly get you the job on its own. Yeah, thats a great thing to accomplish and yes i am proud of her but what about things that she has done that makes her a good canidate. President Obama said that, "It is experience that can give a person a common touch and a sense of compassion, an understanding of how the world works." So i hope that he is not relying on that card.
ReplyDeleteBut i do believe that she is a good candidate other not just because of her life goals but of the good things she has done as a lawyer and judge. i also think that she will do great on the Supreme Court by this statement that she made.
i dont believe that we should bend the Constitution under any circumstances. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."
i guess we will just wait and see!
Sarah Cartrett
In my opinion I believe that Sonia Sotomayor should be confirmed by the Senate. While looking up information on her in the New York Times, USA Today, and White House Press Office I found some interesting information.
ReplyDeleteSonia Sotomayor has been a judge of the Second United States Circuit Court of Appeals since 1998 in which she was apppointed by President Clinton. She also served on as the United States District Court judge fot the Southern District of New York. She was appointed this position by 1992 by Republican President George H. W. Bush.
If she is confirmed into office she would be the first Hispanic justice in the court's history, and the third women. She would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years. In her 1997 confirmation hearing, Sotomayor spoke of her Judicial philosophy saying, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do what we have to do to honor it." She has honored the Constitution, the rule of law, and justice of ten forging consensus and winning conservative collegues to her point of view.
With this being said, these are the main reason why she should be confirmed because I believe she will uphold the law and abide by the Constitution.
Elizabeth Haynes
In my opinion I believe that Sonia Sotomayor should be confirmed by the Senate. While looking up information on her in the New York Times, USA Today, and White House Press Office I found some interesting information.
ReplyDeleteSonia Sotomayor has been a judge of the Second United States Circuit Court of Appeals since 1998 in which she was apppointed by President Clinton. She also served on as the United States District Court judge fot the Southern District of New York. She was appointed this position by 1992 by Republican President George H. W. Bush.
If she is confirmed into office she would be the first Hispanic justice in the court's history, and the third women. She would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years. In her 1997 confirmation hearing, Sotomayor spoke of her Judicial philosophy saying, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do what we have to do to honor it." She has honored the Constitution, the rule of law, and justice of ten forging consensus and winning conservative collegues to her point of view.
With this being said, these are the main reason why she should be confirmed because I believe she will uphold the law and abide by the Constitution.
Elizabeth Haynes
I forgot to post my references but they are listed below:
ReplyDeletehttp://topic.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopic/people/s/sonia_sotomayor/index.html?
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoral/post/2009/05/672737771
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/background-on-judge-sonia-sotomayor/
Elizabeth Haynes
Like Sarah, I found the majority of articles to be about her life struggles. Although I do not believe the decision should be based mainly on that alone. I do believe her past would help her because it is hard to make the right decision and voice an accurate opinion when you have not experienced the situation for yourself. Her education and previous experience is commendable. During an interview with Sen. Jeff Sessions, she discusses her beliefs on the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteFollowing several other committee members, Sessions began his questioning of Sotomayor with a standard conservative point of concern. Did she agree that "if we respect that Constitution, we have to enforce it, the good and bad parts?"
"Absolutely, sir," Sotomayor replied.
"And we really undermine and weaken that Constitution when we try to bend it to make it fit our contemporary feelings of the moment?" asked Sessions.
"Sir," she replied, "I do not believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."
This statement shows that she uses originalism to interpret the Constitution. I think she could be a good candidate, but only time will tell.
Morgan Lockett
Sonia Sotomayor is setting a milestone for herself, other Hispanics, and women. If appointed the position she will be the third female to take a seat on the Supreme Court and she will be the first Hispanic which that itself is of historical importance. Looking beyond her race and gender Sotomayor has an impeccable past beginning from high school to currently. She graduated valedictorian, attended Princeton University and graduated their summa cum laude, and has worked all levels of the judicial system. This alone tells anyone she is determined and ambitious characteristics most people in law does not uphold. But we shouldn’t let her past speak for candidacy today because one thing in life that is always constant is... “change”, in other words she may have grown to be someone completely different from her past.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Margarita Rosa, a Princeton classmate of Sotomayor, said she's always known the high court nominee to be "measured and methodical" in her decision-making. This indicates that she believes in true justice and honors the Constitution.
I do believe that she would be a good fit, based solely on her judicial experience and our former presidents liking her like Bush and Clinton. According to Huffington Post, Bill Clinton nominated Sotomayor to the 2nd circuit and overall she is has great support from republicans. Plus she has demonstrated in her career the ability to make competent decisions that are politically based. Not only that, she also supports gay rights and a women's right for an abortion. Sotomayor's views are not entirely favorable with any of the political party she supports views from them solely based her not the party itself.
~Dretecia Pearson~
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/01/sonia-sotomayor-supreme-c_n_194470.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.bio/
I believe Sonia Sotomayor is a great candidate. Her struggles and differences do not qualify her for the position; her education and success at her formore jobs do. Her unique experiences then enhance her ability for the job. The best quote is when she says, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." This shows she understands the laws of the Constitution, as well as her power and role in the government. I also, think she will do a good job in the role because she doesn't just say we should follow the constitution, rather "do honor to it." I feel this is important because it means she does not only abide by the laws as she should, but that she actually respects them and honors them.
ReplyDelete-Michelle R.
Sonia Sotomayor is no doubt a well fit nominee for the Supreme Court justice. With the overcome of adversity and a impressive educational background gives Sotomayor a great head start in the appointment of Supreme Court.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-rHoXXL8MQ&feature=related (very funny and interesting to watch… msnbc legal argument)
I partially agree with the reason of Obama’s decision for Sotomayor’s appointment, and as he put it “a common touch and a sense of compassion, an understanding of the world works and how ordinary people live.” The other half of me is wondering were Sotomayor’s formal education and career long experience come in to the reasoning of Obama’s decision. I just personally believe that you need to have an equal balance of life experience, education, compassion, initiative. Obama’s reasoning is just too poor for such a position like this. I felt like I had to bring this point up, because it bothered me that our president is making such weak decisions and reasoning’s.
Although I believe Sonia Sotomayor is a very strong candidate for the Supreme Court I think it’s only fair for it to be confirmed by the Senate. Sotomayor has such an exceptional educational background and career record, from graduating summa cum laude (highest honors) from Princeton University and Yale Law School both with full scholarships and her thirty year long career in the legal system.
There is one statement made my Sotomayor that might question her philopophy and that is “I don’t believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstances. It says what it says. We should do to honor it.” Personally even though the Constitution has served America well, I just feel that optimism and being open to new ideas could lead us to such great accomplishment. Also the Republicans need to resist their accusations of Sotomayor’s “Judicial Activism” and re-read the definition of Judicial Activism. I don’t see the issue in judges making new policies and their initiative to get involved political matters.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-ed-sotomayor27-2009may27,0,1504105.story
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/04/hoping-sotomayor-is-first-and-last-in-line/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IegH8S8QM5M
-Andrew Mewshaw
After some quick Google searches on Sonia Sotomayor, I was bombarded with stories about her controversial quote in 2001 as well as her upbringing as a Latino woman. With some further searches, however, I was able to find a quotation of Sotomayor’s that really confirmed my opinion. She said, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this quote among other examples of her rulings, I was convinced that as a Supreme Court Justice, Sotomayor, would definitely rule under the philosophy of judicial restraint. Also, after learning about her career at Princeton and Yale and, on further as a lawyer and judge, I feel confident that she will be able to view cases that come through the Supreme Court objectively. So based on her career, I feel that Sonia Sotomayor is a good nominee and would make sound decisions as a Supreme Court Justice.
Jason Hoffman
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/01/sonia-sotomayor-supreme-c_n_194470.html
Through research I found that Sotomayor is known to be a liberal judicial activist. Sotomayor said “a wise Latina woman..would be more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white man”(Barnes 2). Although she has stated a few comments that the public would be as “bad”(Barnes 2), she is still viewed to be strict to the law. She also seems to want to do what is right. After Obama declared Sotomayor as being “committed to the rule of law and principles laid down by the Founding Fathers”(Barnes 2). I believe that Sotomayor will have success in becoming the Latina in the Supreme Court. Sotomayor was the first Latina to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals. “She has participated in over 3000 panel decisions and has authored about 400 published opinions”(Lee 1). Due to her success, I believe that she should be confirmed.
ReplyDeleteBarnes, Fred . "What Could Go Wrong? For Sonia Sotomayor, anything. ". The Weekly Standard. June 4, 2009 http://galenet.galegroup.com.library.usca.edu:2048/servlet/HistRC/hits?docNum=A200993646&tab=2&locID=uscaiken&origSearch=true&hdb=ALL&t=RK&s=1&r=d&items=0&secondary=true&o=&sortOrder=&n=10&l=dJ&sgPhrase=false&c=3&tabMap=66&bucket=iac&SU=Sonia+Sotomayor
Lee, Jesse. "The President’s Nominee: Judge Sonia Sotomayor". The Briefing Room. June 4, 2009 http://www.whitehouse.gov/Sotomayor.
Noemi Bauer
Judge Sonia Sotomayor is certainly stirring things up on the hill with her recent comments,"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." This comment has lead to heavy criticism from the republican party. One Politician accused Sotomayor of being tied to the La Raza group and referring to it as a latin KKK of sorts. The media is adding their usual spin on comments made. It is heavily discussed daily and the racial implications are heavily frowned upon.
ReplyDeleteDespite the controversial comments made by Sotomayor, she would bring positive influence upon the supreme court seat. The image that the white house is presenting for her is right on target. She possess a brilliance for law and the understanding of how it works. Her support for cases involving workplace disability discrimination and international law certainly will not hurt her chances of being appointed. Sotomayor's meager upbringing, Latin background and female will only add to her appeal to the people. History will be made, she will be the first person of Latin culture and only the third female in the seat. I believe that she would uphold the constitution very well.
Shelette Johnson
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/01/sonia-sotomayor-supreme-c_n_194470.html
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/sonia_sotomayor/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=sonia%20sotomayor&st=cse
Well, I have to say after my research on Sonia Sotomayor I must disagree with everyone. I do not feel she should be confirmed. I do believe that she will be walked through the confirmation process quite easily and quicker than most because of her race and gender. Personally, I do not care about either, but in a position like this, it could definately affect the decisions she is responsible for making.
ReplyDeleteI say this because she has a very inspiring life story. She will not only be a racial 1st but only the 3rd female to serve on the Supreme Court. She places heavy emphasis on her race and gender not only in her campaigning but in her decision making process also. She was a part of many majority decisions written in the seat she currently holds....some of the more prominent cases she has written opinions on or found judgement on suprised me.
One was the 94-95 baseball strike. She ruled against the team owners in this case...not allowing for the players to be replaced by other less experienced players so that there would be no delay in the start of this season....this of course made the public very happy at the time.
A second case decision that she was primarily involved in was Ricci vs. New Haven (i think). The defendants in this case were white men and one hispanic. The city of New Haven threw out the test used for promotions because not enough minorities were able to pass the test and qualify for promotion. Mr. Ricci was a caucasion male, with dyslexia, who stated he had to study harder due to his disability to pass the test....he stated it was not fair to him to throw the results out because others, did not study as hard as he did. She upheld the decision of the local city government to throw out the test results. While he was disabled (though not considered minority because he was white), she voted instead for the "minority".
She has multiple times given opinions which were very troubling to me. Some were said in public, are stated in several of the above comments listed by other students but two that concern me most I have listed.... the first being,
"The Court of Appeals is where policy is made."
--Sonia Sotomayor
I do not feel it is the judges responsibility to make the policy, the constitution does that, it is her job to interpret the constitution. Two totally different things.
"The danger inherent in this judicial view is that the law isn't what the Constitution says but whatever the judge in the 'richness' of her experience comes to believe it should be."
--Wall Street Journal Editorial
This states it simply.....her experience will over-ride the law written into the constitution.....This can not be a good thing.
The last point I will make supporting my decision is that 3 out of 5 decisions have been reversed by the Supreme Court. This is a large percentage...60%. Now to give some perspective, she actually issued 380 majority opinions in 11 years. The Supreme Court heard only 5 cases of those which she issued opinions....3 were overturned....hmmm...makes me think hard.
Soooo.......No! I do not support Sonia Sotomayor as a cadidate for nomination to the Supreme Court!
REFERENCES
http://politics.newsvine.com/_news/2009/05/30/2880708-obama-court-pick-puts-spotlight-on-sessions
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=90182547586
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/27/60-reversal-of-sotomayor-rulings-gives-fodder-to-f/
http://race42008.com/2009/05/28/slates-awful-awful-defense-of-sotomayors-ricci-ruling/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/sotomayors-judicial-record-battlefield-critics-advocates/
From what I have read and see about her, I feel like she knows what she is talking about and she has a good head on her shoulders. I do no think that her past or upbring should keep her from becoming a candidate! We need more diversity and opinions! Lynlee Satcher
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI don't feel that she is going to make a very good Justice, however, I am fairly sure she will be appointed. Her work with Pavia & Harcourt is my main gripe with her. She worked for a fairly well known firm, as a general service litigator, dealing with intellectual property (which is a sticky and messy affair, requiring serious compromising and haggling and jockeying for position in the courtroom) and also she dealt with some European high-level business companies. International business ties? Not a quality I'm looking for in an impartial judge.
ReplyDeleteHowever, since she's very likely going to be instated, I hope her dealings with the international businesses don't affect any judgement.
Joshua Hopperton
Wow! So many excellent comments—I have a lot to say in response. And I will have to do it in two separate comments because the Blog limits the length of my comments!
ReplyDeleteOn grounds of qualifications and experience, as most all of you say, she is highly qualified. And even the opposition in the Senate admits that much. She has been twice before confirmed for the federal bench -- once as a district judge and then as an appeals court judge. The claim that she was nominated by a Republican president, though true, is a bit misleading, as GHW Bush was forced to make the nomination through the process of "senatorial courtesy," something we will study later in the chapter on the courts.
Should conservative senators vote against her because she is probably liberal? That is a tough question. It is a political question of great significance. On the one hand, Obama as senator voted against Alito and Roberts on ideological grounds, so his argument that Republicans should vote on the basis of qualifications rather than ideology is disingenuous (this means hypocritical).
On the other hand, it creates a political trap for conservative Republicans, especially those in states where a large Latino voting population lives. Republicans MUST reach out beyond their older white male southern base, or they are doomed to defeat in the future. To vote against a qualified Latino does not help their cause. Were I a political advisor in the White House, I would be hoping that all conservative Republican senators vote against her--they would be shooting themselves in the leg! Oh, and if you think that court nominations are not about politics, you might also believe that lions are vegetarians! We will learn more about the political nature of the so-called nonpolitical courts later in the judicial branch chapter.
Republican would be wise to swallow hard and just vote for her. In addition to avoid alienating Latinos, there are two other political realities they should consider. First, they will lose even if they vote against her--a few moderate Republicans certainly will vote for her in any case.
Second, she will not change the ideological balance on the court. She is likely to be a moderate liberal who replaces another moderate liberal. She may even be a little less liberal than Souter. On a series of affirmative action cases she more than often sided against affirmative action, and as Josh pointed out, she may have sympathies with corporations due to her corporate legal experience.
Ok -- the rest of my comment is in the next comment! Bob B
Ok, the rest of my comment--my last comment is on how Sotomayor fits in with the different philosophies on interpreting the Constitution, the question I asked you to consider. Now that you have looked at the Constitution in a little detail, you KNOW that it MUST be interpreted because of the very nature of the document. It is general, vague, leaves a lot unsaid, and filled with compromise and contradiction. And we have no possible way to figure out how the founders would have intended it to be applied to things like abortion or the Web. So these arguments are really about which way helps one side or the other get the policy outcome they want, not about philosophy. Sotomayor will be no different that Roberts or Scalia or any of the rest of us--she will see the document through the prism of her life experience and when there is a choice, she will choose the precedents (previous cases) and interpretations that fit her values. Sometimes that will be seen as activist and sometimes as restrained. We will have a lot more to say about then when we look at how the Supreme Court decides cases.
ReplyDeleteThe one case I want to point to is the New Haven case involving the promotion test that the city threw out when it appeared to be racially biased. She was one of a three judge panel that went along with the city allowing it to throw out the test, which appears to make her supportive of affirmative action. On a majority of other cases, as I mentioned earlier, she went the other way. However, in this case her position was one of judicial restraint, not judicial activism, because she rejected the appeal on the basis of existing precedent, not because she wanted to make new policy. This was the existing policy. She and the other two members of that panel said they had sympathy for the applicants who worked so hard to pass the test and then did not get promotions, but as a matter of law they went with precedent. This certainly suggests that she does not hold as liberal a set of values as conservatives might assume—again she seems close to Souter, the justice she will be replacing. If the Supreme Court overturns the Appeals Court decision, it will be acting in an activist way, creating new policy, rejecting existing law and precedent. They may well do that. But social conservatives who criticize her for that particular decision are really calling for activism and policy making by the court, precisely what they say they are against. Bob B
I think that she should be confirmed and would be an excellent candidate. I have read about her upbringing and several great things she has achieved such as the incredible amount of judicial work she has completed. She has an enormous amount of experience and has been quoted saying that she would bend the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteKatherine Edmonds
Oops...the last statment should have read, "not bend." My apologies!!
ReplyDeleteIt seems that the reaction to Sotomayer is decidedly mixed. From what I have read, she is a competent and qualified candidate - fully capable of performing as a Supreme Court Justice. I don’t believe her race or gender makes her more qualified for her position than any other justice, nor should it facilitate any sort of expediency in the process. So what if her perspective is a little unique? Rather than focus on who she is as a statistic, I choose to focus on what she has done as an individual. Her interpretation of the constitution is just as valid as anyone else’s, right? Then again, its still early on in the process, and Sotomayer hasn’t fully had an opportunity to address a number of issues that have or may be deal-breakers in the future.
ReplyDeleteOn another note, I don’t have television, so I have been spared the repeated out of context Fox News sound byte, but I can’t help but chuckle at the idea that she has in anyway displayed “reverse racism” through her (now infamous) comment. How can you “reverse racism” anyway? Is that even possible? Isn’t it considered racism either way?
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/05/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5065714.shtml
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085
-Matthew Cabbil
The most controversial thing I found on her was her stand on abortion. As a female I would have guessed her stand to be pro-choice and I like that she stands by it. She was also appointed to positions by two previous presidents (Bush then Clinton) so her being appointed by a third shouldn't shock anyone
ReplyDelete