In a letter New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau says that “Judge Sotomayor was a fearless and effective prosecutor while she was here, and I am sure that none of the defendants in her cases thought of her as a liberal.”
So she was tough on criminals. The only problem is that she is not running for a DA position or nominated for Attorney General, she is being nominated for the Supreme Court. In this role she is known as a liberal activist. Some of her personal statements reveal this truth.
While speaking at Duke University Law School in 2005 Sotomayor said the following “All of the legal defense funds out there, they’re looking for people with court of appeals experience because it is…court of appeals is where policy is made…and I know, and I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don’t make law I know [audience laughter] … um, I, okay, I know, I know….I’m not promoting it, I’m not advocating it, I’m, [audience laughter] you know [Sotomayor laughter] okay.”
Earlier in her career while speaking at Berkley she said the following “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” In this same speech she affirmed her stance that to judge is an exercise of power and that there is no objective stance, but only a series of perspectives. It is interesting that there was little talk of the constitution.
These statements alone would make me question whether she is qualified to become a justice in the Supreme Court. It is scary to think that someone who would judge with personal feelings instead of interpreting the constitution (as Obama was looking for) could be put into this position. Nothing reveals this more than the recent Sotomayor decision of the 2008 case, Ricci vs. DeStefano.
In this case the city of New Haven, Connecticut threw out firefighter promotion tests because no minorities passed the test. Evidently the tests did not have the results the city wanted and were afraid of lawsuits from minority groups. Sotomayor sided with the city. This case has now been appealed to the Supreme Court and will likely be overturned in favor of the firefighters. If it is, of the 6 Sotomayor decisions referred to the Supreme Court, 4 would have been overturned. It is another case of Sotomayor placing personal feelings over the law. Even her liberal counterparts would agree. Judge Cabranes, a Clinton appointee, said Sotomayor’s opinion “contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at he core of this case” and its “perfunctory disposition rests uneasily with the weighty issues presented by this appeal.”
And for those gun enthusiasts out there, the case of Maloney v. Cuomo might be of interest to you. In Sotomayor’s opinion she stated that under the Constitution it is legal for a city or state to ban all guns as was the case in Washington DC. That has sense been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So it looks like Obama has found his judge who values empathy over the constitution. Who knows what it is like to be poor and a minority. The RNC and Republicans in Congress have restrained from negative comments on Sotomayor. Hopefully that does not keep them from asking the tough questions that need to be asked during her confirmation.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Great report on the state of the highest court in the land. We don’t have much to look forward to, do we?
Posted something similar myself. I actually read more than one article that talked about how it was important to find a woman to replace Judge O’Connor. Huh? We are we looking for a woman, rather than the most qualified individual?!
Awe…thats not true MKP. We get to look forward to being called a racist for opposing a hispanic candidate
Steve - I think just about every special interest group in the country went to this administration pushing their candidate. The hispanic groups were probably the most powerful.. ie La Raza
Congratulations Judge Sonia Sotomayor,
For being the first Hispanic Supreme Court Justice Nominee. Largely due to George W. Bush’s possible candidates of Emilio Garza and Alberto Gonzales were threatened with filibuster by Harry Reid and the Democrats before they were actually nominated. Also, for possibly being the third female justice to server on the court. Harry Reid suggested that President Bush nominate Harriet Miers for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s position, but then Democrats threatened to block her nomination as well.
This was not the first time that your name has come up for consideration. In 2005, when Judge O’Connor announced retirement, RINOs Bill Frist and Arlen Specter along with Democrat leaders Harry Reid and Patrick Leahy presented President Bush with your name as one of their choice of “moderate” Hispanic federal judges that they could accept. However, National Review, a conservative magazine, suggested that your nomination from the Democrats was in bad faith because you were too liberal for a conservative president to seriously consider. I suppose next to President Obama’s normal company, you are “moderate”.
You have had a long experienced career as a judge. You have also had previous experience with the Supreme Court as you have had five decisions as an appellate judge go before the High Court. Granted, that three of them were overturned. However, you still have one more case decision headed to the High Court, but this one doesn’t look like it will help your winning percentage.
Democrats are pushing for an accelerated timetable for you confirmation. This falls in line with President Obama’s actual application of his promise of a five-day public review period after Congress passes a bill before he signs it. With everything that was hidden in the 1132-page Omnibus Bill, we have to wonder what surprises you hold in store for us.
Prior to your nomination President Obama pledged “I will seek someone who understands that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a case book, it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives.” This gave us insight to his standards for a nominee. Possibly leaving room for a justice who would prefer to legislate from the bench than interoperate the constitutionality of a law or court ruling.
Justice O’Connor has said “that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases.” Your retort to her comment was “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”. I am not certain where heritage determines your duties.
In closing, it is with this letter of congratulations I will leave some parting words. I hope that when the time comes you use all of your wisdom and previous experiences when reviewing cases that come before you. Especially when the case is regarding Texas’ Sovereignty Under 10th Amendment and any other state that wishes to affirm the Constitutional Limitations of the Federal Government.
Thank you for your service to OUR Country the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave,
Jason Sanborn
From the soon to be former State of Texas