Very Serious Question About Judicial Nominees
If you consider yourself "fair and balanced", non-partisan, objective then consider this.
Should a judicial nominee who believes that a person of a particular skin color and upbringing will reach a better (or worse) conclusion than a person of another skin color be disqualified based on that fact... any judge, much less the Supreme Court?
Of course, that is a extremely radical position which goes against everything this country stands for and was founded on.
Skin color and ethnicity have nothing to do with reaching conclusions... we're long past that.
Well then, shouldn't Sonia Sotomayer's statement from a speech (regarding Latino Supreme Court nominees) that "a Latino woman with her life experiences will reach a better conclusion than a white male" exclude her from sitting on the Supreme Court?
Imagine Justice Roberts had written in a speech regarding Supreme Court nominees that he would hope that a white male with the richness of his life experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latino woman who hasn't had that life.
He would have been forced to apologize and withdraw and ridden out of town on a rail.
So then should Sonia Sotomayor.
Sorry, but if we approve judges that believe skin color and reasoning ability are linked then we are in serious trouble boys and girls.
SAY NO TO SONIA SOTOMAYOR... write or call your senator today... this cannot stand.
-red
Should a judicial nominee who believes that a person of a particular skin color and upbringing will reach a better (or worse) conclusion than a person of another skin color be disqualified based on that fact... any judge, much less the Supreme Court?
Of course, that is a extremely radical position which goes against everything this country stands for and was founded on.
Skin color and ethnicity have nothing to do with reaching conclusions... we're long past that.
Well then, shouldn't Sonia Sotomayer's statement from a speech (regarding Latino Supreme Court nominees) that "a Latino woman with her life experiences will reach a better conclusion than a white male" exclude her from sitting on the Supreme Court?
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." -Sonia SotomayorWithout being partisan I say yes it does disqualify her or anyone for that matter who made such an outrageous and radical statement.
Imagine Justice Roberts had written in a speech regarding Supreme Court nominees that he would hope that a white male with the richness of his life experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latino woman who hasn't had that life.
He would have been forced to apologize and withdraw and ridden out of town on a rail.
So then should Sonia Sotomayor.
Sorry, but if we approve judges that believe skin color and reasoning ability are linked then we are in serious trouble boys and girls.
SAY NO TO SONIA SOTOMAYOR... write or call your senator today... this cannot stand.
-red
posted by RD at 4:56 PM
AOL Sports Hottest Athlete
8 Comments:
I would have to say that a person who thinks a person's color makes them a better decision maker has no business sitting on a court of any kind.
In my opinion her statements should disqualify her for a seat on the Supreme Court.
Another statement I heard from her earlier today had something to do with the Appeals courts being where policy should be made. I don't think so!
Nice try. Try again Nobama!
You make some very good points in your article. It just goes to show you that there really is bias in all of this. Had it been someone other than a minority that made those statements, there would have been hell to pay.
There is another thing about this nominee that bothers me greatly. She is being cast as a moderate and a centrist and in reality, she is neither. Judge Sotomayor is a very dangerous person to have on the Supreme Court.
She will be approved with flying colors since it looks like Republicans are taking the advice of Democrats and trying to being more like them... let's see if that gets them elected in 2010...
"Democrat Lite", the new Republican party.
I’ve done absolutely no research on this lady and thus know nothing about here. While this quote specifically can easily be seen as shocking, it is not in context and thus the intent is unclear. The way I interpret this comment is that she believes that the court could benefit from having someone with a new and different point of view (based on life experiences and background) on the bench. Or she could be a flaming racist, but I can’t make the judgment based on this comment alone (plus there is the fact that I can’t read her mind and all). Until I get a chance to read up more on her, I will give her the benefit of the doubt where it comes to this statement. This opinion could easily change once more information has been acquired on my part.
dave... as I said in the post, she was giving a speech... a prepared speech (not an adlib) titled "A Latino Judge's Voice" which I linked to and in that speech she was talking about SUPREME COURT appointments.
Here is the full quote... in context.
"
Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
It doesn't get more racist and sexist than that dave.
Imagine Justice Roberts or Clarence Thomas would have said this about white men or black men coming to better conclusions than Latino women?
Get a grip man.
-red
I give you an opinion (that you asked for by the way) that boils down to I-need-more-information and you insult me. That is just precious Red. And you wonder why you piss me off on a daily basis.
I haven't had time to read up everything about this lady so screw me for wanting to know more about her than this quote or one speech (which I haven't read) provides. I have a life man.
I insulted you? I'm sorry.
I thought you insulted me by saying I posted her comments out of context and therefore (unclear) couldn't be trusted to evaluate.... when her comments were in perfect context and she was perfectly clear about what she meant.
I'm sorry if I was short with you on the "get a grip" deal, but wouldn't it have been easier to have just said... assuming what she said is true and in context... this is what I think?
You know how I am about everything being a gray area.... this is a serious question about the supreme court and racist/sexist comments and hypocrisy. It's either wrong or not no matter the politics.
Take your time and think about it and get back to me when you get a chance... honestly, I'm sorry for the getagrip thing.
Dave makes an important point without realizing it:
He'd like to take the time to read more about her before he comes to a decision.
Obama wants this woman pushed through as quickly as he can. Why? Because of people like Dave, who are going to do research on her, given time.
Dave is going to read her comments in context, and see that she's made that statement about seven times in the last three years, in different venues.
Dave is going to say, "Whoa - Sonia's a racist who has been overturned 60% of the time, and who doesn't let the law get in the way of her agenda."
Given time.
So Dave can't be given time. The Dems want this shill pushed through as soon as possible, so that they can seat her, and then hope that Dave says, "Well - it doesn't matter now."
Post a Comment
<< Home