Sotomayor An Unknown Quantity On Executive Power Issues

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Sotomayor An Unknown Quantity On Executive Power Issues stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 05-26-09 03:40 PM   |   Updated: 06-26-09 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Obama Supreme Court

Back in the dark ages of, say, yesterday, when I had settled into the (totally wrong) mindset that today's nomination announcement was going the way of Elena Kagan or Diane Wood, I was most interested to see how the choice impacted the executive powers that Obama has largely held over from his predecessor. It is the argument of the Three-Dimensional Chess set that Obama intends to rollback the Bush power-snatching in a permanent -- or at least difficult to reverse way -- the theory being that the courts would establish firmer and lasting parameters for executive power than an executive order or personal decision would.

It's not an argument I find terribly convincing, but the choice between Kagan and Wood was definitely a choice between an endorser and a critic of unitary executive power, respectively. The question now is, which way is Sotomayor likely to go? And the answer is: nobody really knows! Charlie Savage sums it up thusly for the Washington Post:

By contrast, one person near the top of Mr. Obama's short list -- Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit -- has never worked in the federal executive branch and sits on a court that hears few executive power cases.

And, as often as executive power controversies intersect with the prosecution of the war on terror, that's really just the tip of the iceberg. As Savage shrewdly points out, "the broad powers Mr. Obama has employed in the economic crisis, like his virtual takeover of the American auto industry, could generate a new category of cases that would turn on how much deference the court gives to the executive branch."

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]


Back in the dark ages of, say, yesterday, when I had settled into the (totally wrong) mindset that today's nomination announcement was going the way of Elena Kagan or Diane Wood, I was most interested...
Back in the dark ages of, say, yesterday, when I had settled into the (totally wrong) mindset that today's nomination announcement was going the way of Elena Kagan or Diane Wood, I was most interested...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
31
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- harriscrl3 I'm a Fan of harriscrl3 191 fans permalink

Some one help me understand here do I hear that Progressives have a Problem with a Latino Woman from the projects. Are you saying Progressives have a problem with Latinos, Women and people who came form a poor background? Heck she also came from a single parent household.

So now Progressives have a problem with all these factors. Seems to me that many of you wanted him to chose someone who was Gay not because they were flaming liberals but because they were gay. Now we get someone that fits into three disadvantaged categories and you all have a problem

So help me understand cause maybe I need to turn in my progressive badge cause the hypocrisy is starting to REEK.

Trust me some of you need to be careful about going down this road. You need to think twice.

Carol

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:34 AM on 05/27/2009

Just remember to thank the appropriate president when that happens and it won't be Obama responsible for bringing that on...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 AM on 05/27/2009

I never could understand why the media would have even had to guess as to his choice was going to be.Obama is going to play politics as usual.Change my ass!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 PM on 05/26/2009

To what politics as usual are you referring? What is your definition of Change? Care to elaborate? Pinhead!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:57 PM on 05/26/2009

Obummer really knows how to pick em'

Sad day for those who love the Constitution. Great day for those who hate it.
All in all under liberals this country is going down the toilet faster than you can grunt.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:00 PM on 05/26/2009
- Brian F I'm a Fan of Brian F 2 fans permalink

Yeah, cause the country sure wasn't founded on any kind of liberal ideas...*rolls eyes*

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:45 PM on 05/26/2009

Sad days for the Constitution? Did you pull that out of your rear for the sake of mud slinging? What is it that concerns you so much about Judge Sotomayor's nomination? Care to elaborate you pinhead?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:58 PM on 05/26/2009
- Waltfl I'm a Fan of Waltfl 49 fans permalink
photo

I went all the way down in the past 8 years. There isn't much down there any more.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 PM on 05/26/2009
- nolabels I'm a Fan of nolabels 56 fans permalink
photo

and you studied the law where?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:15 AM on 05/27/2009
- Choicelady I'm a Fan of Choicelady 66 fans permalink

Hey Justin - Obama is letting courts rule on the Bush plans and NOT contesting the decisions that shoot down Imperial President powers. Had you not noticed? It's faster and easier than taking time to rework the arguments. If you're looking for ideological purity over fast and efficient ways to stop the excesses of the past 40 years (beginning with Nixon), then you are being foolish. Obama is not using those powers or supporting them - he's letting the courts intervene to stop them. Hooray for good sense!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:40 PM on 05/26/2009

I will sum up her views for you. "Pay no attention to blind justice. I am going to make sure the "little guy" gets preferential treatment in the courtroom"...a clear violation of the oath she has taken and will take.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:09 PM on 05/26/2009
- Choicelady I'm a Fan of Choicelady 66 fans permalink

Poppycock. The issue is that the little guy will now get EQUAL treatment, and that is well within the oath to uphold the LAW.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:41 PM on 05/26/2009

But if the big guy has a bulletproof case against the little guy her empathy will put her in the little guy's shoes and judge in his/her favor. Wrong no matter what your political stance is. The statue of justice is blindfolded for a reason and obama has no right to take it off.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:06 PM on 05/26/2009
- nolabels I'm a Fan of nolabels 56 fans permalink
photo

Absolutely. The law is meant to save the little guy because, after all, if there were no rules to this game, the people with the power would always win.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:20 AM on 05/27/2009

Nope. The non-interv­entionist, non-activists on the right (Roberts, Alito, et al. Thomas doesn't really decide he cheats off of Alito's paper) habitually and reflexively decide in favor of powerful interests. This has the effect of closing off justice for the individual in all too many cases. They have one eyed covered anyway.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:01 PM on 05/26/2009

Upton-And what makes your summary of her views correct I wonder?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:59 PM on 05/26/2009
- BLBass I'm a Fan of BLBass 32 fans permalink

great point, i see 3 ways to read it:
- she's pro-unitary executive, or less extreme but still in favor of broad authorities, and Obama picked her as a cipher to prevent this from derailing the nomination. Doesn't make much sense from my reading of a few of her cases, but it's possible.

- she's going to roll back executive power and that's why he picked her. No real way to know right now.

- she's going to rule on these issues according to the law, whatever it says. My impression so far is that this is most likely, and she's been lucky to avoid having to take sides on thorny issues like this.

However it shapes up, it's definitely interesting that her views on the topic haven't been ferreted out yet.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:58 PM on 05/26/2009

If you think you've provided an analysis I should remind you the word "speculation" You're speculating through the nose for the purpose of self gratification. Why don't you wait a bit longer and then closely watch her confirmation hearings?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:01 PM on 05/26/2009

Sorry Jason I know this is an important issue going forward but we also don't know how she feels about Green Eggs and Ham or whether the new Star Trek is better than the original Star Trek.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 05/26/2009
- bigsioux I'm a Fan of bigsioux 35 fans permalink

That's the problem.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:36 PM on 05/26/2009
photo

Even though Dr Seuss and Spock may have had a profound impact on your life, I believe that the views of a judicial nominee are slightly more important.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:52 PM on 05/26/2009

Anything Bush did to expand presidential power is minor to the vast powers Obams is claiming. He is nationalizing banks, firing corporate CEOs and dictating to courts how to handle bankruptcy cases. This just shows how silly and political all those attacks on bush were.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:48 PM on 05/26/2009
- ObamAtomic I'm a Fan of ObamAtomic 140 fans permalink
photo

C'mon Obama is doing what is necessary to fix previous economics mistake.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:53 PM on 05/26/2009
- Whatashame I'm a Fan of Whatashame 19 fans permalink
photo

That's right because they are all imcompetent.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:16 PM on 05/26/2009
photo

Struck a nerve did our POTUS? It was Ok for Boosh to spy on citizens, deny people due process, t.or.ture, to name a few things, but BO attempting to rein in corporate criminals and help people get back on their feet is where you draw the line.

Whatever.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:27 PM on 05/26/2009

Let's see you use your brain for once right .Maybe if your savoir bush hadn't ruin everything may he wouldn't have done those things .O yeah that were already started by bush ever thought of that . You're a republican my bad ,I forgot thinking is too much work for you guys.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:05 PM on 05/26/2009
- Choicelady I'm a Fan of Choicelady 66 fans permalink

Uh - BUSH nationalized the banks. He can certainly fire CEOs if they are taking OUR money - that's sound fiscal responsibility to the taxpayers. I see no evidence that he's directing courts to do anything whatsoever. Where's your evidence?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:43 PM on 05/26/2009

Bush tried and tried, but liberals blocked him regulating go to YOUTUBE it 2003. Go ask obama about our 7.5 billion to Chrysler that is gone and taxpayers will just have to make it up. I cannot beleive liberals got so mad about 165 million to AIG oh thats right your obummer got on TV and pitched a staged tantrum, but 7.5 billion just gone and nobody says a word. Whats wrong with that picture. Real sound fiscal responsibility right there now. Wake up america, before long we will be speaking chinese.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:13 PM on 05/26/2009
- ranchero42 I'm a Fan of ranchero42 25 fans permalink
photo

Force the Executive branch to protect, preserve and defend the Constitution of the United States? What a unique concept; give me a minute to wrap my head around it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:41 PM on 05/26/2009
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect