Sonia Sotomayor: Easy Target For The GOP
As announced by fellow TMV colleagues Holly Robinson and Pete Abel, President Barack Obama has selected federal judge Sonia Sotomayor as his pick for the Supreme Court (Politico story here). As soon as the announcement came, text messages and e-mails started flooding to my Blackberry from various family and friends. What amazed me was how these pro-Obama, black and brown Democrats weren’t happy. Here are some excerpts from e-mails and texts:
“Obama has made it soooo easy for the GOP!”
“Now I have to hear about how Obama only looks at things through racial lenses. My stomach hurts!!!”
“GROAN! If I have to start the “white people pick white people all the time” line again to justify this pick, I’m going to die.”
“Judge Sotomayor said that her background has a Latina makes her a better judge than white men. WOW! Every conservative pundit is going to plaster her words all over the place. My head hurts just thinking about it.”
“You know me. I’m all for diversity. But couldn’t Obama find someone a little more moderate????”
“Rush Limbaugh and Company are going to work this until it bleeds to death…”
No praises. Just concern about the optics of this pick. I can’t lie to you, I was somewhat dismayed by the pick for similar reasons. I hate rehashing race in selections like this. But that’s being selfish. Judge Sonia Sotomayor has the qualifications. Apparently she has the moxie. But what frequently happens when the controlling party makes a Supreme Court pick, copious amount of static is generated. Not saying that is wrong. We should debate all Supreme Court nominees. But the static from THIS PICK will be laced with arsenic because of the current political environment. Judge Sotomayor’s selection is the PERFECT rally point for a weakened and divided GOP. Like gasoline thrown on a fire, Judge Sotomayor has so many areas to attack for the GOP (that comment she made about being a better judge than a white male has such strong legs that it will shatter the 100M sprint world record). She’s a very easy target for the GOP.
But I have to throw out my selfish reasons for not wanting a Sonia Sotomayor selection. I do welcome this pick. Judge Sotomayor is VERY different from past Supreme Court nominees due to her experiences and most likely she will be confirmed. That would make for an interesting Supreme Court dynamic that may be the better for it. Sometimes a shakeup of opinion and worldview is needed to “freshen” a situation (not that you can freshen Supreme Court law up that much). But not before the GOP lets loose with all guns blazing.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
7 Responses to “Sonia Sotomayor: Easy Target For The GOP”
If you look back at the record of republicans opposing liberal Supreme Court candidates, you’ll find an argument based on questioning decisions and writings as they pertain to sound legal reasoning and adherence to the Constitution.
Even if the candidate is diametrically opposed to conservatives in ideology, if they are qualified, the right votes in large numbers to confirm.
This is in stark contrast to the childish, personally destructive invective brought by the left when the conservatives place a name into contention. Although a candidate on the right has unquestioned qualifications, left-wingers routinely vote against them on political grounds.
If it is true that Obama picked this person primarily because she is a Hispanic woman, he has degraded the office of President and lowered the status of Supreme Court Justices.
I do not care for her judicial philosophies, but she is an eminently qualified jurist, and should be confirmed quickly without rancor.
I am not saying that will happen, but if the Republicans act like the Democrats did during Roberts's, Thomas' and Alito's hearings, I will be greatly disappointed. It will also be interesting to see the press coverage to any resistance that does develop, and compare it to the aforementioned confirmations.
As always, great news for Republicans. President announces liberal leaning, highly qualified jurist to help shape legal opinions for the next 20 years on the highest court of the land, and most likely has the votes to confirm – great news for Republicans!
jwest said: “This is in stark contrast to the childish, personally destructive invective brought by the left when the conservatives place a name into contention. Although a candidate on the right has unquestioned qualifications, left-wingers routinely vote against them on political grounds.”
Can't argue much with you there since my significant other has been part of that group. Ooops. I hope she doesn't she this comment!
AustinRoth said: “I am not saying that will happen, but if the Republicans act like the Democrats did during Roberts's, Thomas' and Alito's hearings, I will be greatly disappointed. It will also be interesting to see the press coverage to any resistance that does develop, and compare it to the aforementioned confirmations.”
I think your press coverage point is VERY interesting. It has been obvious that Obama's historic win has jaded the press at times. The press is human and I'm not shocked by it. BUT if the resistance by Republicans matches what Democrats did with Roberts, Thomas, and Alito, will the press amplify as “the worst ever”. Although I don't necessarily like these Supreme Court nominee fights, press coverage should be fair. SHOULD BE. HOPEFULLY.
RevDave said: “As always, great news for Republicans. President announces liberal leaning, highly qualified jurist to help shape legal opinions for the next 20 years on the highest court of the land, and most likely has the votes to confirm – great news for Republicans!”
I didn't say that it was good news. Just that this pick is makes it easy for Republicans to oppose.
Partisan opposition to appointees on political grounds under the cover of “advise and consent” was wrong when the Democrats did it, and it's still wrong. Hopefully she will be approved quickly with minimum grandstanding.
(that comment she made about being a better judge than a white male has such strong legs that it will shatter the 100M sprint world record)
T Steele –
Can you quote and reference that comment? (beyond the fact that a family member told you so?) Hope so…
Here is the quote with some context. Its quoted from a speech delivered at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law and published in 2002 in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal. I'll let you all decide what is being said…
” In our private conversations, Judge Cedarbaum has pointed out to me that seminal decisions in race and sex discrimination cases have come from Supreme Courts composed exclusively of white males. I agree that this is significant but I also choose to emphasize that the people who argued those cases before the Supreme Court which changed the legal landscape ultimately were largely people of color and women. I recall that Justice Thurgood Marshall, Judge Connie Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and others of the NAACP argued Brown v. Board of Education. Similarly, Justice Ginsburg, with other women attorneys, was instrumental in advocating and convincing the Court that equality of work required equality in terms and conditions of employment.
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.
Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. 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. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.
However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see.”