Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor's Record Shows Rulings Within Liberal Mainstream

Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON -- Judge Sonia Sotomayor has built a record on such issues as civil rights and employment law that puts her within the mainstream of Democratic judicial appointees.

Read the whole story: Wall Street Journal

Comments

[Doofus]

Using the 'slam dunk' rule, the only prominent candidate who is
female + Ivy League (Harvard or Yale) + a serving judge was Sonia
Sotomayor. The rest get to wait for next time & will they ever be ready.
(Good luck, non Ivy-Leaguers & non-Judges!)

[Doofus]

The oldest remaining justice 'John Paul Stevens was born in Chicago, Illinois, on April 20, 1920. He was graduated from the University of Chicago in 1941 and from Northwestern University School of Law in 1947.' [http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/justices/histBio.html]

It would be excellent if new Justices could be added who are not Ivy Leaguers.
Maybe when Steven retires, that'll happen. Texas, Emory, Gonzaga even.
Hopefully not Liberty or Regent, but you never know.

[ranchomerced]

Liberal mainstream? Oh good; at least shes not a communist.

[RofWH]

I'm a liberal. I know liberals. She's no liberal, just a main-line Democrat.

[kali47]

Is anyone concerned that Roe. v. Wade will almost certainly be overturned?
What about our daughters???
Kali

[naschkatze]

I'm not worried about that, but the Congress should get off their a$$e$ and get that FOCA bill passed. What I am concerned about is that she will side with the 5 (and Obama) on upholding all the attacks Bush made on the Constitution and Obama not going after war crimes.

[freeme6]

None of this makes any difference,she will be confirmed,she was nominated for political gain cant blame him thats the world we now live in.Say what you want about the left or right evrything from this election forward is all about party first country second and our enemies see it as does the whole world.HOPE and CHANGE well hope for the best, prepare yourself for the change thats worse!!

[naschkatze]

I think it's all a kabuki dance, and the right really is not that concerned about her.

[Citizen54]

Let's hope she is questioned about her philosophy and rulings regarding corporations. Roberts is clearly a corporate pawn, but not once in his hearings was he asked about the power of big business vs. the individual. Instead of focusing on Rowe v Wade, let's look into this nominee's corporate vs. democratic values. Corporations are the most powerful force in America, and it would be good to have another justice who isn't in their pocket. That's more important than race or gender.

[tds1273]

What questioned by the people in the beds and pockets of those same corporations? You'll have to excuse me if I don't hold my breath.

I'm starting to fear Jonathan Turley was correct when he said a couple weeks ago on Countdown, that we are seeing "the greatest bait-and-switch ever pulled on the American public".

Granted it is still early into his administration and as a smart poker player Obama is slow playing to the very end, but the question is just who is he actually bluffing? I'm worried that this and his emerging national security/civil liberty policies are his tells showing.

[naschkatze]

I saw Turley's comment on "the greatest bait-and-switch ever pulled on the American public" too. I agree with him 100%, but unfortunately our fellow sheep will not realize it until it's too late.

[PINO]

When President Bush nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, Sen. Joe Biden had this to say:

"I think that the only reason Clarence Thomas is on the Court is because he is black. I don't believe he could have won had he been white. And the reason is, I think it was a cynical ploy by President Bush."

It's two decades later. Clarence Thomas has proven himself a smart, tough, and effective jurist. Joe Biden is now vice president - and his administration has made what looks very like a pick motivated by affirmative action considerations. Maybe somebody should ask Joe Biden whether Sonia Sotomayor would have been nominated if she had been male and white. And the great thing about Joe Biden is -- the guy might blurt the truth.

[TJCole]

Her decisions coincide with the most conservative corporate Judges 95% of the time, that's a well known fact, and her Flight 109 Decision was the most disingenuous callous work of a corporate shyster and hack....

So much for empathy...

Anyway we are stuck with her, and she is certainly no Scalia, let's just hoe he doesn't recruit her into the Federalist Society...!

[tds1273]

So the Republicans were neo-cons, but it seems as the new Democratic leadership are starting to look like Decepticons.

[naschkatze]

Yep.

[sepiasiren]

Funny how white people can see only other whites as unbiased ( yeah right) and capable of good decisions but minorities run all willy nilly fro their own kind.

It is the same mentality that didn't gather up all white males and put them in concentration camps when Timothy McVeigh blew up a federal building in an act of domestic terrorism, but they freak out and scream for the incarceration of minority groups after one of their "ilk" commits a crime assuming they are all hive minded idiots.

Unbiased? Uh huh...

[henrywolff]

Right, lots of U.S. citizens in concentration camps.

[PoohBear]

Funny how racists unfairly group people according to their race.

[KISHAGREEN]

Well said sis...

[henrywolff]

Unlike this nomination, Americans are not racist.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-supreme-court-poll14-2009may14,0,2842269.story

[Xavieer]

Not Americans just tro//s............

[TJCole]

She votes 95% of the time with right wingers, so why must they lie, she's not liberal when there's corporations or money involved...

95% of the time she votes with right wingers that's what we got...!

[breakingnews3]

She is not in Congress. She does not "vote". She decides on the rule of law. If that determination happens to support a Republican point of view, then so be it. She is not there to make the law, just rule on it.

[Citizen54]

Call it what you like, but the Supreme Court makes the law in this country.

[JDJase]

I vote this to be the dumbest comment of the day

[breakingnews3]

2nd the motion.....

[Scorch20]

Sotomayor..not that competent..get another who is more qualified. Olgetree was more qualified. Just goes to show Obama likes to recycle from the Clntons...does seem to have any thought processes on his cabinet picks or justices. Steppin fetchin!

[postman66]

Supreme Court has had 6 white male justices who had NO judicial experience, but of course a man who uses Steppin fetchin as an insult was probably home schooled and wouldn't know that.

[naschkatze]

Talkin' about Clarence Thomas?

[breakingnews3]

Yea, Latina women, or all brown people for that matter cannot be smart or competent. Unless they are cleaning the bathoroms or mowing the lawn, right?

Nice job keeping the talking points alive. She is smarter and has more judicial experience at this point in the Nominating process than any of the other seating Justices.

But dont let facts get in your way....

[blairtone]

what's a 'seating Justices'?

[tds1273]

Garbage.

Between you and Scorch20, YOU were the only one that brought up race or sex.

The reality is that she clearly keeps her interests in the corporate spectrum and sides with business interest to a far greater degree than the peoples'.

When the already unbalanced court loses one assuredly liberal (read: The Peoples') vote and is replaced with a seemingly assured conservative(read: Corporatist') vote. That is certainly not change, it is just a new driver driving the same bus towards the same cliff.

Race and Sex have nothing to do with it, it is a strawman intended to distract from her actual record.

Mind your step around those facts now....

[sepiasiren]

The only competent and unbiased picks are republican white men--didn't you get the memo? *sarcasm*

[TiffanyHusseinBanned]

So Republicans wanted Judge Sotomayor to legislate from the bench when it benefited a white man, but when it benefits poor people, women aborting babies, or minorities, she isn't allowed to legislate from the bench.

Repubs should be proud of her on the Ricci v. DeStefano

She did not legislate from the bench. Or do you want it both ways, Repubs.

Make up your minds.

[WowJones]

Tiff, none of the Luddites have any idea of the background of that decision, which she based on precedence.

[blairtone]

No she didn't

[confidance government]

Neither Party has a reputation for standing on its principles. The Supreme Court has long ago been absorbed into the legislative branch to rubber stamp its decisions, the idea of an independent judicial branch died a long time ago.

[VictoriaP]

When will every decision made by a white person assumed to be influenced by his or her whiteness? When will whites be automatically, publicly and critically assessed by the MSM through the lens of white privilege and their underlying inherent motivation to do that which is to the benefit of whites, while detrimental to people of color?

[blairtone]

have another one

[confidance government]

From reading the comment section, it appears that a lot of people are doing just that.

[Reaganwater]

GORDO and cohorts : where are you ?
you need 20 reversals to limit her to a 95% ruling still-standing rate.
Have you got the reversals ?
It sure does not look like it

[postman66]

Reaganwater, slow down. The reversal rate is based on the number of decisions heard by the Supreme Court, by the number of decisions reversed. That is the formula for all courts. The other cases not appealed don't count.

[Reaganwater]

Look -- MORE than 95% of her case rulings stand . So this "poor performance"' ...........
well , let me call it STUFF , is nonsence and misleading at best .