TexasCHLforum.com

President Barack Obama tapped federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, . . .

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090526/ap_ ... reme_court" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, folks, this should be interesting.

There's one sentence in that article that stands out, relevant to this forum

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, 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."

We'll see if she holds true to that if she's selected.

I tried doing a search regarding her, that statement and any previous rulings regarding her and the 2nd Amendment. Came up with vague complaints about her but nothing substantial so far.

dicion wrote:There's one sentence in that article that stands out, relevant to this forum

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, 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."

We'll see if she holds true to that if she's selected.

We should be able to tell how well she's held to it by her case record.

dicion wrote:There's one sentence in that article that stands out, relevant to this forum

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, 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."

We'll see if she holds true to that if she's selected.

Depends on what she thinks it says in the first place.

Few little tidbits about her. Can't find any "controversial issues" that she ruled on. Maybe one of those that ducked hard decisions so she could make them later on the Supreme Court?

and some quotes:
“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,” said Judge Sotomayor

This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I’m — you know.”

No, I DON'T know what you mean.

74novaman wrote:Few little tidbits about her. Can't find any "controversial issues" that she ruled on. Maybe one of those that ducked hard decisions so she could make them later on the Supreme Court?

and some quotes:
“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,” said Judge Sotomayor

This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I’m — you know.”

No, I DON'T know what you mean.

Sounds to me like she's admitting that policies are made in appeals courts, even though its not the best idea?
I hope?

Might be. They certainly tried to paint her as a "Rule of Law", strict Constitutionalist type of judge at her introduction this morning. I'm not so certain.

Liberals traditionally view the court as a backdoor to advance social and political equality. I have a hard time believing Obama would nominate someone who wasn't willing to push rulings that were "good" for people.

In the end, whether I like her or not, she'll probably get the nod.

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,” said Judge Sotomayor

I have a Mexican grandmother, but I am not sure why her conclusion should be any "better" than mine.

Seems like a fairly racist statement to me. Coupled with her dismissal of the firefighters case of reverse discrimination, seems like she's not a big fan of white people.

Wonder how a judge who had made statements about making better decisions then black people or hispanics would get received as a nominee.

Wish people would realize its wrong both ways, not just one.

Wow. Racist and sexist.

Well, let's move it over here then:

Where is this babe comin' from:



[Ilya Somin, May 26, 2009 at 10:02am] Trackbacks

The Sotomayor Pick:

I am not yet sure what position to take on President Obama's selection of Sonia Sotomayor. My general sense is that she is very liberal, and thus likely to take what I consider to be mistaken positions on many major constitutional law issues. I am also not favorably impressed with her notorious statement 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." Not only is it objectionable in and of itself, it also suggests that Sotomayor is a committed believer in the identity politics school of left-wing thought. Worse, it implies that she believes that it is legitimate for judges to base decisions in part on their ethnic or racial origins. Stuart Taylor's comments on Sotomayor's speech are telling:

Any prominent white male would be instantly and properly banished from polite society as a racist and a sexist for making an analogous claim of ethnic and gender superiority or inferiority.

Imagine the reaction if someone had unearthed in 2005 a speech in which then-Judge Samuel Alito had asserted, for example: "I would hope that a white male with the richness of his traditional American values would reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life" — and had proceeded to speak of "inherent physiological or cultural differences."

I may have been wrong in suggesting that Alito's preappointment record was "far" more impressive than Sotomayor's. But I still do think that he had a significant edge. That said, I reiterate my view that Sotomayor's credentials are good enough that she should not be rejected on qualifications grounds. The real objection to her is based on judicial philosophy.

UPDATE #2: It should be noted that Sotomayor put "I would hope that" immediately prior to her statement that a "wise Latina" judge would generally make better decisions than a white male one. I don't think that the "I would hope" materially changes anything in a context where it's pretty clear that she thinks that the hope is justified. After all, the statement comes in a paragraph criticizing Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's reputed view that "a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases." Sotomayor's comment would not be a meaningful criticism of O'Connor's unless Sotomayor thought that the wise Latina judge really was likely to do better than a white male "more often than not."


http://volokh.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This isn't looking good: http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/ ... sotomayor/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Since the Heller decision, only two federal appeals courts have written on the Second Amendment. That’s six judges out of about 170. Of those six, three said the Second Amendment does apply to the states. And those judges were out of the liberal Ninth Circuit in California, and included a judge appointed by Bill Clinton and another appointed by Jimmy Carter. — Even leftist judges can get this."

"But not Judge Sonia Sotomayor. She is one of only three federal appellate judges in America to issue a court opinion saying that the Second Amendment does not apply to states. The case was Maloney v. Cuomo, and it came down this past January."

I was watching her on CNN and they said that her statement was not as you typed it. She basically said that she would hope a latina woman would make a better decision than a white man who had not had the experiences.

We are also taking things out of context. We don't know what the question was or the context.

Her comment may have been taken out of context, but their is no mistaking the inferrence by Lou Dobbs and others that the same comment by a white male judicial candidate would be considered intolerable under any circumstances.

Looking ahead, would it be possible for Sotomayor to steer the Supreme Court against incorporation of the Second Amendment?