Wise Women Unite! What Sotomayor Should Have Said

I suppose it's a good thing Sotomayor's confirmation hearings have been a little boring and uneventful. I keep waiting for the scandalous hidden love affair to emerge, but nothing. No affair, unpaid taxes, or skeletons to derail her confirmation -- hats off to the team that vetted her nomination.

What has become a sticking point, though, are Sotomayor's comments at Berkeley where she had the nerve to refer to herself as wise. If that weren't enough cause for alarm, she went on in the same speech to imply that she might reach a better decision than a white man in a similar position or faced with similar judicial questions. How dare she? Everyone knows white men set the bar when it comes to making fair and impartial decisions. They never allow their background or experience to influence their judgment.

In answering Senators Leahy and Sessions' concerns over her "troubling" wise Latina remark, she should have stood tall and defended her comments. Instead, she backed down. She offered that her comments were taken out of context and a bad joke that didn't go over well. She also pledged her undying commitment to the law and impartiality.

What she should have said however, was, I believe I am wise and like Justice O'Connor I am aware of how my experiences not only as a woman, but a Latino have not only made it more difficult for me to pursue and reach my goals in this country, but have shaped my worldview and perspective. I am standing here before you today as a Supreme Court justice nominee because it took wisdom from a very young age to navigate a system that was not designed for my success. In these rapidly changing times, it will take wisdom, prudence and a brilliant command of the law to help decide many of the important cases that will come before me as Justice. And I am prepared.

So, she didn't say these words because to do so would have been political and judicial suicide.

It is disingenuous to deny the role one's background, heritage, and experience play in one's perspective and decision-making. Racial and ethnic minorities and women are the only groups asked to check their identity at the door. It is assumed that once given access to power and resources, they will try to funnel those resources and power to their own kind. Sound familiar?

Sotomayor's nomination hearing is an important reminder of how far we still have to go in terms of incorporating the diverse range of experiences into our structures and institutions. Unless she has in the words of Senator Graham "a complete meltdown" or has the audacity to own her wisdom unapologetically, she will become the next Supreme Court Justice of the United States.

Comments

[sixyfivepercentwater]

"It is disingenuous to deny the role one's background, heritage, and experience play in one's perspective and decision-m­aking." Of course it is. It is also naive to believe that a person in her position can say she's better qualified in any regard because of her sex or because of her race than another person. If a white man had said the same words, implying that he might be better able to make a decision simply because of his experiences as a white man, he probably would not have been nominated for the Supreme Court, let alone pass the vetting process.

[GraceNeeded]

C. Nicole Mason - Thank-you very much for sharing these thoughts. They lend the different perspective I was looking for. I am sorry DenverJim I disagree with you. Race and ethnicity are not moral choices or sexual preferences that people can't legitimately disagree with. I want to live in a world where people are "not judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character" (MLKJr.) but I DON"T want to live in a world where people feel the freedom and license to flaunt sin and degradation, which are obvious signs of their character and its content, and expect everyone else to be tolerant of it. There are some moral absolutes in our laws or we would have Sodom & Gommorah all over again.

[Carol Snow]

True True!!!!

[DenverJim]

Agreed with your article. I'd just add one other group to the list that are expected to surgically remove their identities, and that would be gays. I can't imagine this group of arrogant old white men would have been any easier on an openly gay person. In fact, an openly gay person wouldn't have made it as far as Sotomayor. That being said, I look forward to having her impartial and unique perspective on the court.

[ywcachieve]

That was an arrogant comment she made. Latinas don't corner the market on wiseness.

There are people who are wise in all races, and genders.

[jhamm1]

Indeed. Mason seems to have forgotten the "better" portion of her comment (no pun intended), in which case a literal translation of her words (if even differing somewhat from her intended meaning) states that Latinas are in effect "wiser" than everyone else.

[incognito-ergo-sum]

The loaded questions are bad enough, but Grahams insults are too much. For the first time I would like to slap someone in the face, and I, as a bleeding heart liberal should never think such thoughts.

[gettingitright]

What an insightful piece! The irony of all these old, white, (presumed) wise men attacking a minority woman on her "racist" tendencies. You couldn't make this stuff up!