The knives are already out. With conservatives proving they will go so low as to invoke 9/11 to twist Sotomayor’s judicial opinions into something they are not. But given Pres. Obama’s Supreme Court campaign kick off today, it seems he’s daring Republicans to come gunning for his nominee. He won’t be disappointed.
Wendy Long of NRO goes long:
Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written. She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one’s sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench.
She reads racial preferences and quotas into the Constitution, even to the point of dishonoring those who preserve our public safety.
But it is on the now controversial case of the recent firefighter case Ms. Long twists reality to fit her vision, digging in to use 9/11 to make her case against Sotomayor:
On September 11, America saw firsthand the vital role of America’s firefighters in protecting our citizens. They put their lives on the line for her and the other citizens of New York and the nation. But Judge Sotomayor would sacrifice their claims to fair treatment in employment promotions to racial preferences and quotas. The Supreme Court is now reviewing that decision.
Talk about tortured rhetorical logic.
It doesn’t compare to Ramesh Ponnoru, who offers the most hilarious charge in his Sotomayor is a lightweight fantasy post, “Obama’s Harriett Miers.” No, he’s not kidding. Evidently a woman of Puerto Rican parents who grew up in the projects of the South Bronx, diagnosed with diabetes at age 8, who then made it to summa cum laude at Princeton University, where she earned the highest award given to Princeton undergraduates, Pyne Prize, who then went on to get her J.D. from Yale Law School, where she was an editor of the Yale Law Journal equals lightweight. Only in the alternative universe of Mr. Ponnoru. Republicans can try to come at her, but if they want to be taken seriously they should ignore Mr. Ponnoru (though I hope they won’t).
On MSNBC Jonathan Turley is “disappointed,” speaking as a legal academic.
Sotomayor has “never had a death penalty case,” according to CNN’s Jeffrey Tubin.
“Hard pressed politically” to oppose Sotomayor, is Julien Epstein’s appraisal of what Republicans will face in opposing her. He’s correct. If Republicans are smart they’ll outline her judicial opinions, then save their fire for another day, because Obama will get another pick before this is over.
Judge Sotomayor will be heard through her confirmation, but Pres. Obama beginning her campaign will be what’s heard tonight. The first political salvo, if you will, and a powerful one at that. As the old saying goes, elections have consequences. Judge Sotomayor will be confirmed and likely with many more than 60 votes.
Some of that outcome will be because of politics, of course. It’s not like Hispanics won’t be watching each Republican in the Senate.
Segue to one of NRO’s latest posts: Drudge highlights Jeffrey Rosen’s New Republic (hit) piece… Ah, yes, trying to make Drudge relevant again.
Scotus is more sane.
In the coming nomination fight, we won’t allow conservatives to truncate quotes or take things Sotomayor has said out of context, which is their first stop before swiftboating fine people who deserve what they’re being given, because they’ve earned it. Currently that’s being done with one particular quote about Latino women having better judgment than a white male. Sotomayor’s full speech, entitled “A Latina’s Judge’s Voice,” is powerful, the money quote being used against her, but offered in full context, below:
… 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. [...]
Conservatives will make their case. As they would say, bring it on. Judge Sotomayor is one strong, well qualified and equipped Latina woman they won’t be able to back down.
Comments are closed.