Obama Names Sotomayor As Supreme Court Pick
President Barack Obama said he didn’t feel any pressure to pick a woman or a minority as his Supreme Court nominee – but then, as expected, he selected a woman who also happens to be a minority.
Sonia Sotomayer – a federal appeals court judge – would be the third woman and first Hispanic named to the court, if you’re counting.
And obviously, everybody is counting.
What’s her story? Well, she hails from a housing project in the South Bronx and describes herself as an “ordinary person who has been blessed with extraordinary opportunities and experiences.”
Of course, conservatives are calling her “a liberal judicial activist of the first order,” and are already calling attention to quotes Sotomayer has made in the past indicating she believes her heritage should dictate decisions made from the bench.
In other words, here we go …
Comments
By randee on May 26th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Any justice without kids raises some red flags, in my mind. Having children gives one a “vested” interest in the consequences of one’s rulings. Kids broaden your perspective and make you less selfish.
By BIN Proletariat News Staff on May 26th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Congratulations comrades,we have made one more large step in our agenda of fighting capitalism and to bringing fairness to the proletariat.
We have made huge progress in just months.The Commissar is strong and the sheep are still asleep.Be ready ,for once the capitalist dollar is crushed we shall rush in.We will not be forced to pretend to care about the evil constitution .
By Brian on May 26th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
I think President Obama has made a wonderful decision. She is first and foremost a brilliant jurist that has fairly decided cases as a federal judge and appellate judge. She was nominated by the first Bush to be a federal judge so she can’t too controversial. She has experience as a prosecutor and litigator and has attended some of the best schools in our country. While being a woman and hispanic is important to interest groups it is irrelevant for how judges might conduct themselves.
These things only matter politically and while it may be wrong, it is what it is. Politically, the Republicans will walk right into the President’s trap if they try to fight this too hard. GWB did a pretty good job with hispanics while in the White House but McCain fumbled that pass badly in the election along with the rest of the party. The numbers are the numbers on this issue and any person that looks at the growth in the number of hispanics who vote in this country over the next few decades will easily determine the absolute necessity of holding this bloc. Do all hispanics vote in a bloc, no. Just like all whites and blacks do not either. However, large sections of minorities have very similar life experiences that allow them to look up to people who look like them who have been successful. These individuals are held up as pillars of their minority community and are how large blocks of minorities ultimately vote for one party or another on the whole. If Republicans demonize and attack the first hispanic Supreme Court nominee when the President already has the votes to win they will not only look stupid but they will lose in the short run and the long run by further alienating a bloc of voters they can not be a majority party without.
By Victor on May 26th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Cardozo was the first hispanic SCOTUS member in my book.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Cardozo
By weighing in on May 26th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Randee,
Then with that mentality catholic priests shouldn’t serve as marriage counselors, single folks shouldn’t coach kids if they don’t have kids and we should never elect anyone that is unmarried without kids. The list is infinite, although I do understand where you are coming from, but I digress…..
Back to the subject though, I think it will be hard for conservatives on this pick. Female, hispanic, appointed by George H.W. Bush to the Federal Court and then raised to the Appeals court by Clinton. She is bipartisan, or better yet non-partisan. She’ll sail through.
By Liberty fo me on May 26th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
I would love to wake up and you people had somehow grown a brain!!!!!!!!
If we wanted to live in socialism,we would move to China.This woman sided that a test given to firemen was racist because no blacks scored high enough.I wish all of you flag wavers were the ones who spent hours going to school and studying to progress in life and to have it all shut down because you were white.You fascist idiots
By Pat Hendrix on May 26th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Liberty, that was a coherent and well thought out post. You called everyone “flag wavers” (?) “facist idiots” and socialists – which I know will bother some people since they are on opposite ends of the political spectrum – but nevertheless, your post crammed in more insults per sentence than any other at fits today. Congrats – no small accomplishment.
If I had one suggestion: You could have stopped with one exclamation point. And good luck with being disadvantaged minority. I know from personal experience I feel totally disadvantaged as a white dude.
By Liberty fo me on May 26th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Racism is rascism…We are supposed to be a Republic of FREEDOM.
We are a supposed to be a Republic of Law..Law that is blind and fair…DUDE.
I hope you are the first one they come after…ohh..and they are coming.
You will just think that all the socialist agenda is coming to help you, when they take your last dollar and beat you into the cell.
By Liberty fo me on May 26th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
I meant flag waver in the sense of supporting the judge…not of being a Patriot ..sorry,my mistake
By Liberty fo me on May 26th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Sorry…but now that I am talking about flag waving and it is after memorial day and I dont have to worry about being crass. I am sick of Shawn Hannity and Hannity Jr (keven Cohen)Using their supposed patriotism and bullshit passion to promote war and aggresion.I think it is a thin veil and I am tired of it.(Sorry again I know this is off the subject).I hope people soon see these Neocons for the Fascists they are.Its all about the freedoms they want you to have..not all freedoms for everybody.
Poser assholes!!
By Not Sayin', Just Sayin' on May 26th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Anyway, I’m glad that at least the California supreme court got its act together and upheld the ban on fag marriages.
By Larry the CAble Guy on May 26th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
What a hag?
By Sam on May 26th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Brian – “She was nominated by the first Bush to be a federal judge so she can’t too controversial”
That’s flawed logic. Bush 41 was also the one who put Suiter on the court and he has been nothing but a clone of Breyer and Ginsburg.
By cerius on May 26th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
She looks really hung-over in your picture. Is she a drinker?
By Elmo on May 27th, 2009 at 8:08 am
Is she more qualified to do the job than Harriet Miers? Does she have more experience in the court system than Harriet Miers?
By it's me on May 27th, 2009 at 9:37 am
I’ve seen that face before…..
Oh yes. Look at your dollar bill, it’s George Washington in drag.
By Brian on May 27th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Sam – It would only be flawed logic if I thought Ginsburg and Breyer were poor justices. If Ms. Sotomayor follows their example she will be very successful. GWB’s dad did a pretty good job picking judges.
By Pamela Jeanne on June 1st, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Randee’s comment is beyond offensive…it’s just plain ignorant.