The Supreme Court Nomination Thread

[I.J. Reilly]

It appears that Obama will be nominating Sonia Sotomayor to be the next member of the lifelong club known as the Supreme Court. This article should give you a little background on who she is and what she stands for. A few notable things about her:

1. She is a woman. This is notable becuase the court currently has only 1 female justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and RBG has recently loudly lamented the absence of other female voices on the court. Also, approximately 50% of the population is of the female persuasion and some feel they therefore deserve better representation among the highest court in our land.

2. She is hispanic. Notable because, if confirmed, she would be the first hispanic justice. Representative of the larger trend of the growing hispanic population in the US. Also an example of Obama looking for a more "empathetic" justice, as her life experience as a minority would presumably put her better in touch with the trials and tribulations of minorities.

3. She once said that a "court of appeals is where policy is made," which is a statement that should ruffle a few feathers as she goes through the nomination process.

4. Notable decisions include:
a. Ending the baseball strike in '95, ruling on the side of the players and saying that the owners were trying to subvert the labor system.
b. Recently upholding New Haven's decision to throw out a set of fire department promotion tests because no minorities scored well enough on the tests.

[byu71]

It appears that Obama will be nominating Sonia Sotomayor to be the next member of the lifelong club known as the Supreme Court. This article should give you a little background on who she is and what she stands for. A few notable things about her:

1. She is a woman. This is notable becuase the court currently has only 1 female justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and RBG has recently loudly lamented the absence of other female voices on the court. Also, approximately 50% of the population is of the female persuasion and some feel they therefore deserve better representation among the highest court in our land.

2. She is hispanic. Notable because, if confirmed, she would be the first hispanic justice. Representative of the larger trend of the growing hispanic population in the US. Also an example of Obama looking for a more "empathetic" justice, as her life experience as a minority would presumably put her better in touch with the trials and tribulations of minorities.

3. She once said that a "court of appeals is where policy is made," which is a statement that should ruffle a few feathers as she goes through the nomination process.

4. Notable decisions include:
a. Ending the baseball strike in '95, ruling on the side of the players and saying that the owners were trying to subvert the labor system.
b. Recently upholding New Haven's decision to throw out a set of fire department promotion tests because no minorities scored well enough on the tests.

What I am going to tire of is hearing how great she is in being qualified. In other words she is the "best out there" for the job. This is a political appointee and if she wasn't a she and hispanic and a liberal President hadn't been elected, she wouldn't be going to the Supreme Court.

That being said, I wish her well in her political job.

[RobinFinderson]

She might be too hot for the job.

[Clark Addison]

She might be too hot for the job.

I don't think that is the case.

[YOhio]

This will be interesting to watch. The GOP is in a tough spot on this one. The risks of opposing her are obvious. I suspect there will be the appearance of a tough confirmation hearing, but she'll end up sailing through with little real opposition.

I predict that Sessions or Coburn will be the most vocal voice of opposition on the GOP side and Hatch will be the most sympathetic Republican on the committee. Bennett will be obligated to vote against her on the floor to avoid the Utah conservative backlash, especially considering that he voted for her Circuit nomination in 97.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

What I am going to tire of is hearing how great she is in being qualified. In other words she is the "best out there" for the job. This is a political appointee and if she wasn't a she and hispanic and a liberal President hadn't been elected, she wouldn't be going to the Supreme Court.

That being said, I wish her well in her political job.

The New Republic ran a column that more or less questioned her command of the law and even her intellect. Clearly she is accomplished and she's infinitely more qualified than, say, Harriet Miers- not to mention Clarence Thomas at the time of his nomination- but apparently there were brighter liberal minds out there. Obama found someone that passed the litmus test who also happens to be both a minority and woman. But it sounds like she very well may not be the intellectual counterweight to Scalia and Roberts.

BTW, Obama is probably going to get two more justices in his first term alone. Stevens is ancient and Ginsburg has pancreatic cancer.

[JohnnyLingo]

She once said that a "court of appeals is where policy is made," which is a statement that should ruffle a few feathers as she goes through the nomination process.

At least she came out and said it. I give her credit there. Too many Justices believe it and pretend they don't.

[YOhio]

At least she came out and said it. I give her credit there. Too many Justices believe it and pretend they don't.

Here is the quote. I'd like to see the entirety of the statement because in context it looks a like it could be a lot less damning than what the single phrase would suggest.

[YOUTUBE]OfC99LrrM2Q[/YOUTUBE]

[JohnnyLingo]

That was quite a CYA moment. "I don't support this line of thinking, but it's the reality we have to deal with," is an interesting approach.

[YOhio]

That was quite a CYA moment. "I don't support this line of thinking, but it's the reality we have to deal with," is an interesting approach.

I just found the entire clip. It looks like she's giving career advice to law students and is explaining practical differences between an appeals court clerkship and a district court clerkship. I hope the GOP doesn't plant their flag on that one line.

[YOUTUBE]ug-qUvI6WFo[/YOUTUBE]

[SeattleUte]

The New Republic ran a column that more or less questioned her command of the law and even her intellect. Clearly she is accomplished and she's infinitely more qualified than, say, Harriet Miers- not to mention Clarence Thomas at the time of his nomination- but apparently there were brighter liberal minds out there. Obama found someone that passed the litmus test who also happens to be both a minority and woman. But it sounds like she very well may not be the intellectual counterweight to Scalia and Roberts.

BTW, Obama is probably going to get two more justices in his first term alone. Stevens is ancient and Ginsburg has pancreatic cancer.

She was Summa Cum Laude at Princeton and on the Yale Law Journal. I'd like to see how the credentials of the author of the New Republic piece (a lawyer turned journalist on a legal beat?) stack up.

[myboynoah]

An activist labor loving quota monster.

Conservatives could not have asked for a better choice.

[byu71]

She was Summa Cum Laude at Princeton and on the Yale Law Journal. I'd like to see how the credentials of the author of the New Republic piece (a lawyer turned journalist on a legal beat?) stack up.

That doesn't mean shit to me. So what. I thought Obama was looking for someone with "life experiences". Most people who experience life don't even know what someone on the Yale Law Journal staff does.

[LA Ute]

She was Summa Cum Laude at Princeton and on the Yale Law Journal. I'd like to see how the credentials of the author of the New Republic piece (a lawyer turned journalist on a legal beat?) stack up.

Good observation. Whether or not she got into those schools because of affirmative action, she excelled when there and will be hard to challenge. At the same time, I note that a blue-chip educational background has not stopped liberals from claiming Clarence Thomas is not bright enough to be on the court.

Al I am hoping for in the confirmation hearings is a mini-seminar on the role of the courts, judicial activism, and the like. She should and will be confirmed, IMO.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Good observation. Whether or not she got into those schools because of affirmative action, she excelled when there and will be hard to challenge. At the same time, I note that a blue-chip educational background has not stopped liberals from claiming Clarence Thomas is not bright enough to be on the court.

Al I am hoping for in the confirmation hearings is a mini-seminar on the role of the courts, judicial activism, and the like. She should and will be confirmed, IMO.

I admittedly questioned the article somewhat. Even outworking people doesn't produce a summa cum laude designation at Princeton, she's got to have a lot of brains. But no one ever questioned Roberts and Scalia's intellects. Her opinions are supposedly overturned quite frequently. This either means that her intellect is suspect or she's conclusion driven and is willing to fudge on some important details.