-- Advertisement --

A Judicial Review: Justice Sonia Sotomayor

Analysis on a potential candidate for Supreme Court
Justice Sonia Sotomayor

President Barack Obama will soon name a Supreme Court nominee to fill the shoes of Justice David Souter.

Mr. Obama has stirred the pot in explaining what he is looking for in a justice, saying, “I will seek somebody with a sharp and independent mind, and a record of excellence and integrity. . . I will seek someone who understands that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a case book, 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. I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with peoples hopes and struggles as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes.”

This is more a working man’s justice than an ivory tower intellectualism. Critics have already attacked Mr. Obama’s statement as though it sacrifices legal principles in favor of emotional sympathy. This is hardly likely, given Mr. Obama’s own background in education, role as a constitutional law professor and keen intellect, but it remains to be seen whether the issue will play into the selection of a candidate or the argument at hearings on confirmation. The overwhelming Democratic majority in the Senate may finally reduce the hearings to the pro-forma confirmation of years gone by.

Last week I profiled Justice Kim McLane Wardlaw of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Another leading contender for the position is Justice of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, Sonia Sotomayor. Sotomayor was nominated by President George H.W. Bush to the federal bench and promoted by President Clinton to the federal court of appeals. She received bi-partisan support in both Senate confirmation votes, however, her nomination for the appellate position was stalled in the Senate committee by Republican Senators. She was seen as too liberal for objecting Senators who saw the nomination to the 2nd Circuit as preparation for a Supreme Court appointment.

Justice Sotomayor is considered a centrist although her opponents will likely paint her as a liberal in any attempt to derail her nomination. She is fifty-four years old and was born in New York to Puerto Rican immigrant parents. She would be the first Latina Supreme Court Justice if confirmed.

In 1994 she was the trial judge in the Major League Baseball strike case and her decision against the League and its effort to hire replacements and impose a new collective bargaining agreement effectively ended the strike.

The work of judges becomes a political football game when it comes time for nominations. Already Justice Sotomayor is being criticized in the press without much consideration for her judicial ability. More to the point are a list of evaluations of Justice Sotomayor by lawyers who interacted with her in court, provided by Loyola Law Professor Rob Kar:

"She is a brilliant judge and has been mentioned as a potential justice on the Supreme Court."

"She's of Supreme Court caliber. She's very smart."

"She's very smart and well-educated, but she comes from very humble roots and I don't think she's forgotten that. She's still human. She's an outstanding judge."

"I liked her when she was on the Southern District of New York, but I think she's doing an even better job now that she has been elevated to the Second Circuit."

"She's brilliant."

"She's very impressive. She has really done a good job and made a name for herself."

"She's usually right on target."

"She's very scholarly."

"She's really able to tackle anything. She really is a quick learner."

"Even though she's still relatively young, she has a very keen legal mind. She's outstanding."

"She's very well-qualified for the job. She's really very impressive."

 
COMMENTS & DISCUSSION (13) COMMENTS
Carey
May. 12, 2009
10:30 AM EDT
If she's all this, what's the problem? Are these comments all by democrats, do the republicans feel the same way? I don't think there are very many people out there that qualify the way this woman does. Like 0

BIG SAL
May. 13, 2009
11:15 AM EDT
i like her,but im a republican so she wont get it only a far left,fag favoring,kook will,a socialist probally

SAL
May. 13, 2009
11:15 AM EDT
I LIKE HER SOUNDS MIDDLE OF THE ROAD,PROBALLY WONT GET IT NOT SOCIALIST ENOUGH

Tom Cook
May. 13, 2009
11:15 AM EDT
We the People could care less about how impressive this lady is, or how much she adheres to her Puerto Rican roots. All we care about is her respect for the United States Constitution and her understanding that her job would be to judge based on what that document states is the law. No more.

emad
May. 13, 2009
11:15 AM EDT
The world needs a new constitution to protect human rights all over the world

Veronica
May. 13, 2009
11:15 AM EDT
It would be a wonderful thing for Obama to add another female to the Supreme Court as well as a Latina, making the Supreme Court much more reflective of the face of our Nation. I would like to hear more about Justice Sotomayor's views and rulings on education and healthcare.

Michael Sawyer
May. 13, 2009
11:30 AM EDT
I personally am so tired of people who "interpret" our constitution whether they be university professors, so called constitutional experts or jaded politico/legal hacks on the Supreme Court. Our constitution is written in plain English it is quite obvious that the drafters of the document did not intend it to be interpreted, diverted, twisted. convoluted or perverted. They wrote in a straightforward simple manner so that any literate person would know exactly what it said and understand its intent. Why did LBJ sign the Civil Rights Act? It was already spelled out in The Bill of Rights. Why did the Supreme Court "interpret" the First Amendment as meaning separation of church and state? It already states that in the same amendment. Anyone whose lack of literary skills prevent them from reading and understanding: The Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights or the Constitution without having them "interpreted" should not be allowed to hold elected office, judicial office and maybe they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

observer
May. 13, 2009
11:30 AM EDT
A brilliant womwn who knows the law. Let us treasure and respect individuals who think for themselves, uphold the law, with integrity and firmness. God guide his decision and bring wisdom to the senate in screening the nominee.

watchdog
May. 26, 2009
10:30 AM EDT
The job of the supreme court justices is to apply the LAW period. Any decision they make on their "feelings" or empathy not rooted in the constituion and go against it is a violation of the oath they took when appointed. The constitution is the agreement between the people and government. Many judges in this country don't like the fact that the government is restrained in what it can do. Fear these people.

Scott
Jun. 15, 2009
10:45 AM EDT
Sonia Sotomayor and David Letterman have one thing in common, they offer living proof of the fact that a latina woman and a caucasion male can both put their foot in their mouth and make inappropriate statements. Letterman at least had the class to apologize for his inappropriate statement. If Sotomayor were a wise latina woman as she claims, she would have the humility to recognize her own human faility and apologize accordingly.

Robert Trankle
Jun. 22, 2009
06:30 AM EDT
There are many smart, brilliant, scholarly, impressive, people who are quick learners. Not one of these qualifies a person to be on the supreme court.(A lifelong appointment) What I want to know is will she defend the constitution or interpret it to fit her personal agenda?

Madeleine
Jul. 17, 2009
10:15 AM EDT
Ms. Sotomayer is a member of LaRaza, a fact that no one is mentioning or reporting. LaRaza is , what amounts to , a spanish KKK. LaRaza means "the race" to them there is no other, if you are not Spanish you should die or be run out of America. I don't know how they have gained credibility but they have. Sotomayer was interviewed on TV and she explained the group is not racist but it is, I am half spanish so I read their website for a long time, I was dumbfounded to hear their views on Americans and she admitted to being a member, I'm sure she quit itt by now but she was and mybe still is a member. How can anyone say she is not racist when she belonged to a group like that, she also belolngs to the Puerto Rican defense fund which pales by comparison and is not the same kind of group. The senate must know this yet they didn't mention a word, they kept pounding her about her "latino woman " comment. The firefighters testified against her and obviously that meant nothing. I have never seen a Supreme court inerview like this, they were fawning all over her, I'm starting to get scared now, what's going on?

slkorte@aol.com
Feb. 23, 2010
02:31 PM EST
This is in response to Michael Sawyer's response; the reason for an appeal process is due to the previous Law's interpretations not being fully understood. Law is a matter of interpretation and many Laws which meanings were misunderstood or not clearly defined in the past have been written into New Laws. The ability to do that written in the Constitution.

Share your thoughts on the story by adding your comments below. Comments containing profanity, derogatory language, or any form of advertisement will not be approved. Comments will be reviewed by the site's editorial team, so your post may not appear for up to 24 hours. Thank you for your patience.

POST YOUR RESPONSE
 
 
Balance of Power

Track the United States government with updates on the three branches of government.

The Issues