"I will seek somebody with a sharp and independent mind and a record of excellence and integrity," President Barack Obama said in commenting on whom he will nominate to replace retiring Associate Justice David Souter. But President Obama now has an important opportunity to pick someone who, if approved by the Senate, will lead to a Supreme Court that more truly reflects the composition of the American population.
America has been enriched by its diverse Hispanic culture. But this culture has been under represented in our government. Today more than 40 million Hispanics live in the United States, our nation's largest minority population. And, according to recent projections, more than 100 million Hispanics will live in this country by the year 2050, or about 30% of the population. Hispanics are a vibrant collection of cultures and political views. More than three-fifths of the U.S. Hispanic population is of Mexican origin; the other portion includes Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Cubans and people from throughout South and Central America.
U.S. Hispanics are doctors, lawyers, athletes and laborers. Hispanics are American soldiers who serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. They serve as police officers and fire fighters. These men and women are our heroes too. They pay taxes, and own or rent homes. Their children attend our schools and many want their kids to live the American dream. While some Hispanics are third and fourth generation families, still millions more are new arrivals who speak little if any English. They read Spanish language newspapers, listen to Spanish language radio stations and live in tight knit communities. Nonetheless, they make up a booming portion of our economy.
Of his potential Supreme Court nominee, President Obama said, "I will seek someone who understands that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook; it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people's lives, whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation." He continued, "I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people's hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes."
In many ways, the Hispanic hopes and struggles are unique. There are important legal questions around immigration, discrimination and rights to a decent education and health care that call for a Hispanic perspective in our nation's highest court. How can the Supreme Court be truly "empathetic" if its composition does not reflect the the diversity of America? It is time for a Hispanic justice to be seated on the highest court in our land.
From a political perspective, Republicans are likely to oppose whomever President Obama chooses. Should the candidate be Hispanic, such opposition is likely to further alienate their party that has struggled nationally for Hispanic votes. Hispanics are an important voting block in states such as California, New York, Arizona and Colorado. But they may play a decisive role in less populous Southern and Midwestern states in coming elections. Therefore, Republican opposition to a Hispanic nominee just for ideological reasons would be extremely risky.
In the words of our Constitution, "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
"We the people of the United States" includes all of the people of this country. And the strength of America has always come from the diversity of its people, its ideas and experiences. I, therefore, urge President Obama to nominate the first Hispanic Justice for the U.S. Supreme Court. And, by so doing, President Obama can make history again.
As for Mr. Obama's "empathy" criterion, that is inane. It's tantamount to saying you want umpires to be synmpathetic to the identity of the batter when they decide strikes and balls, rather than to rule according to the written rules..
Please be clear, because this issue cannot be shrouded by race.
What you're saying, is that in addition to all of the things that people take into account (geography, academic background, legal opinions, etc.) gender, race and ethnicity should also be taken into account...and that there is nothing wrong with saying so. I agree.
As an African-American, I would have absolutely no problem a Latino on the High Court. In fact, I welcome it. Like you wrote above, "There are important legal questions around immigration, discrimination and rights to a decent education and health care that call for a Hispanic perspective in our nation's highest court. How can the Supreme Court be truly "empathetic" if its composition does not reflect the the diversity of America?"
It's been 64 years after the landmark MENDEZ v WESTMINSTER case that involved a Latino family suing several school districts, and the California Supreme Court agreeing with their position. In fact, MENDEZ v WESTMINSTER provided the legal underpinnings of the historic BROWN v TOPEKA case 9 years later.
I agree Joe: its time for a Hispanic Justice.
we already have two unqualified closed minded nightmares on the court (Scalia and Thomas).
'Qualified' meaning exactly that - qualified as determined ultimately by the POTUS.
What I just wrote is both historically accurate, and entirely irrelevant. Stupid, even - in the context of choosing a supreme court justice.
What's more important than picking someone of a particular race, or gender - is picking someone with a particular kind of life experience. This is the first supreme court where all of the justices have come from the pool of federal appelate judges. Those folks all live a cloistered life, and think about life in a certain way.
We need someone with closer roots to the experience of average people in that job - someone who will be able to filter his or her legal decision-making through the prism of what it's like to be a regular citizen, and not one of the elite.
But as he said that, the truth is, most of the beneficiaries of affirmative action have been WHITE WOMEN. Government and private industry figures prove this.
Obama probably does believe that it should be "income" and not "race", but he also knew that the probably a majority of whites (particularly middle-aged to older whites) automatically assume that when a person of color is selected for something, its because of "affirmative action". The press have contributed to this madness. And, as so many whites say that, white women continue to strike "affirmative action gold" with popular programs like TITLE IX, which is responsible for the hundreds of thousands of women (mostly white) who receive sports scholarships from Division I schools. Sarah Palin was an affirmative action baby who got into college under TITLE IX.
So it is ridiculous for you to automatically see the selection of a Latino or another person of color as "affirmative action" when you know you wouldn't do that if he picked a WHITE FEMALE...now would you?
Actually, I should have written, "who have received" instead of "who receive", but my point remains the same.
It's this cr a p about being overlty politically correct that is killing this country. If most the qualified happens to be purple than nominate them for the job.
The point is to provide a different point of view and be more representatative of the diversity of the country...
This is the Democratic approach.
If you haven't noticed, The Republican approach is to provide the ILLUSION of diversity without the substance. Therefore you get a Clarence Thomas, who takes his cues from Justice Scalia, and doesn't have the brains to ask a a decent legal question, apparently.
And you get a Sarah Palin who knows nothing about the world, but was somehow supposed to be equated with Hillary Clinton, in their eyes.
Fortunately only their 20% base popularion drinks their brand of Kool-Aid.
If you believe otherwise, you are in the minority...Her poll numbers plummeted afterward and McCain never recovered.
No one has ever called Hillary ignorant,,,she is a Wellesley grad and appears to be doing a fine job as SOS. I would never vote for her as POTUS, but I'm glad Obama found her a niche.
BTW...I assume you mean "competence", not COMPETANCE.
doesn't matter as long as she is the right race
Nobody is asking anyone to appoint a lesser qualified candidate simply because of his or her race. He is talking solely about a tie breaker should all other things be equal which, due to a host of qualified candidates for the Court, they generally are on the short list.
It's completely reasonable and there is nothing overly PC about it.
I say Latino