Supreme Court nomination
Brian
7,618 Posts
No thread? How mad are people right now?
Brian
7,618 Posts
Comments
"So she's incredibly accomplished, no blemishes on her balanced and varied record, not to mention her very powerful personal story."
"That's right, and it doesn't look like Republicans have the numbers or will to mount any kind of meaningful opposition. They will be treading carefully to avoid further alienating the growing Latino demographic."
"Ok. So, what are we talking about?"
/tumbleweed
I have not heard much analysis yet.
Why mad?
Seems like a fairly safe pick. She'll probably get through the necessary ugliness to sit on the bench.
The legislature should have empathy when drafting laws, but the judiciary is supposed to be "blind", not partial.
Whether this is an issue Sotomayor, I have no idea.
Her saying that she realizes her judgements do not exist in a vaccuum, and that they affect real people, and that being her view of empathy is something I have no problem with.
Further, as was pointed out by many yesterday, she has hundreds of written opinions, and should be evaluated on those and her judgements, rather than her childhood, her youtube clips, so on, so forth, etc.
C'mon, man.
This is an absolute fiction. If there were not tremendous room and need for interpretation in the law, most of the bench and the bar would be out of business.
Yes, but they are supposed to interpret the law, not the litigants.
And you don't see any room for empathy--or other values--in the interpretation of the law?
Barack was president of the Harvard Law Review and later a professor of Constitutional Law at Chicago. Sotomayor has spent two decades on the federal bench--first in the nation's oldest and (arguably) most high-profile District Court and, later, on its (arguably) most high-profile Court of Appeals. Do you really think either one of them doesn't understand the role of a judge? This conservative critique is about as meaningful and developed as the late-campaign accusations of "socialism" and "redistribution of wealth". Anyone who says this stuff with a straight face should be laughed out of the Senate.
Were talking about humans here, so empathy will always be a factor to some extent, but seeking it as a quality in a judge is peculiar, to say the least.
Despite what the previous two posters here claim, this is not a GOP or party issue - it's a legal one.
Again, this may not be an issue with Sotomayor at all. I never heard of her until yesterday, so I'm hardly an expert on her qualifications.
This is a ridiculous statement, there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. And there are many that are recognized by their authors as reaching what the court consiiders to be an unfair or cruel result because the law required it.
so you've never read any of her opinions, but heard or read a single sound bite where she refers to having "empathy", and this makes you think you can give an opinion on her as a potential supreme court judge?
as far as empathy is concerned...
even if you are clarence thomas, a constructionist, there will always be public policy issues in interpreting the law. in his case, you might ask - what were the founders concerned about when they enacted a specific amendment. so in a sense, you'd have to "empathize" with the originators of the law.
if you are concerned about judge's putting their personal views above the law, take a look at the chief justice, a recent bush appointee. roberts has sided with big business and government in 100% of the cases that have been before him. he has not once sided with the individual plaintiff.
It should be a quality valued for any position or just simply a mark of good character. I think you are conflating it with sympathy, or worse, you parroted some talking point, got busted and are now trying to wiggle out of it.
The GOP should sit out on this one because 1) it is VERY unlikely to impact the balance of the court and 2) her credentials and record are 100% solid.
Oh, and...
Prejudice - A preconceived preference; bias.
I think having a judge who has empathy for people is not a bad thing.
I think having idiots who don't know the difference between empathy and prejudice is.
I guess those judges didn't care much about justice.
If you're going to "quote" my post at least read it, or at least read the part where I declined to give an opinion because I'm not familiar enough with her record.
Okay, dude, if you want to point out hundreds of thousands of cases decided purely on procedural grounds that's fine, but show me some significant Supreme Court decisions or even appellate decisions where there's no empathy.
look for yourself or stay misinformed, im busy and don't care enough. I'm fine with Sonia. Mainstream liberal.
Sometimes you surprise me.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
apparently unfamiliar with the fact that thousands of orders and opinions each year come from "equity courts" and by "equity judges".
empathy is part of the job requirement
Don't be surprised. It's a one-for-one liberal swap. If for some reason, Scalia ends up crossing Thomas, and they accidentally strangle each other and have to be replaced during Obama's term(s), watch Saba wet himself.
Scalia's retirement or accidental death due to erotic asphyxiation is the "dream scenario."
I know this is irrelevant, but I like Sonia's face. She seems like someone I could get along with, unlike the majority of the S.C. regardless of age of politics.
It surprised me that he wasn't taking a chance to attack Obama, and push strutliberals buttons.
I was griping to a friend this morning that Bush got away with appointing farrightwingcorpratetitsuckers to the bench, but Obama appoints a mainstream liberal who Saba finds acceptable.
Which is not a surprise.
Obama has yet to appoint the kind of left wing nutjob I would find acceptable, to anything.
And of course, "activist judge" is bullshit GOP talking point shorthand for "any judge nominated by a Democrat or any judge who ruled in a way we don't like."
The phrase of this nomination is "identity politics." Get used to hearing it 462,931 times a day.
Ahh... "identity politics." The last time I heard the GOP dusting off this chestnut was with the nomination of Sarah Palin.
It really seems like they just can't contain themselves, and are simply not smart enough to heed the advice of Fatback and others on this one. Smh...
what does this mean? i see it all over facebook
This sounds like something the imagined voice of the Republican party Rush Limbaugh would say
It would also be proper to know the name of the offending alleged racist.