Posted on 05/26/2009 7:03:10 PM PDT by Starman417
Richard Epstein rakes Obama over the coals for the reasoning behind his SCOTUS pic:
Evidently, the characteristics that matter most for a potential nominee to the Supreme Court have little to do with judicial ability or temperament, or even so ephemeral a consideration as a knowledge of the law. Instead, the tag line for this appointment says it all. The president wants to choose "a daughter of Puerto Rican parents raised in Bronx public housing projects to become the nation's first Hispanic justice."Obviously, none of these factors disqualifies anyone for the Supreme Court. But affirmative action standards are a bad way to pick one of the nine most influential jurists in the U.S., whose vast powers can shape virtually every aspect of our current lives. In these hard economic times, one worrisome feature about the Sotomayor nomination is that the justices of the Supreme Court are likely to have to pass on some of the high-handed Obama administration tactics on a wide range of issues that concern the fortunes of American business.
He spends most of the article on just one subject, one we should all be worried about with a Sotomayor nomination, the intrustion of government into business. We saw how Obama works with his bullying of AIG and the automakers, and there is definitely more of this kind of crap to come:
Here is one straw in the wind that does not bode well for a Sotomayor appointment. Justice Stevens of the current court came in for a fair share of criticism (all justified in my view) for his expansive reading in Kelo v. City of New London (2005) of the "public use language." Of course, the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment is as complex as it is short: "Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." But he was surely done one better in the Summary Order in Didden v. Village of Port Chester issued by the Second Circuit in 2006. Judge Sotomayor was on the panel that issued the unsigned opinion--one that makes Justice Stevens look like a paradigmatic defender of strong property rights.I have written about Didden in Forbes. The case involved about as naked an abuse of government power as could be imagined. Bart Didden came up with an idea to build a pharmacy on land he owned in a redevelopment district in Port Chester over which the town of Port Chester had given Greg Wasser control. Wasser told Didden that he would approve the project only if Didden paid him $800,000 or gave him a partnership interest. The "or else" was that the land would be promptly condemned by the village, and Wasser would put up a pharmacy himself. Just that came to pass. But the Second Circuit panel on which Sotomayor sat did not raise an eyebrow. Its entire analysis reads as follows: "We agree with the district court that [Wasser's] voluntary attempt to resolve appellants' demands was neither an unconstitutional exaction in the form of extortion nor an equal protection violation."
Maybe I am missing something, but American business should shudder in its boots if Judge Sotomayor takes this attitude to the Supreme Court. Justice Stevens wrote that the public deliberations over a comprehensive land use plan is what saved the condemnation of Ms. Kelo's home from constitutional attack. Just that element was missing in the Village of Port Chester fiasco. Indeed, the threats that Wasser made look all too much like the "or else" diplomacy of the Obama administration in business matters.
Meanwhile Walter Olson writes that the video of Sotomayor talking about policy being made should be ignored but the affirmative action rulings should definitely be highlighted.....but, in the end, they will be explained away and ignored:
(Excerpt) Read more at Flopping Aces ...
So is she a lesbian too? Might as well get every demographic you can!
Link to YouTube video of her making the comment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfC99LrrM2Q
She will not make it. It’s a court of JUSTICE, not “empathy” Mr President.
Three of five of the cases she decided were reversed by the Supreme Court when they were eventually heard there - and Obama wants to put her on the Court - it’s going to be hilarious when the Supremes reverse the ruling in the Ricci case, which she tried to bury by refusing a hearing on it at her level, at about the time her confirmation process is getting into high gear......
Mr. Obama has benefited from his ability to make promises to his backers while keeping the rest of America in the dark as to his agenda. He won the election because people did not know where he stood on many issues, and he knows this. He took particularl pains to make sure that American’s did not know about his advocacy for infanticide, nor about his radically pro-abortion agenda.
He made a major political mistake by attempting to frame Ms. Sotomayor as a person who represents Hispanic American values. While Judge Sotomayor has a compelling story, her values are antithetical to what most Americans, including Hispanic Americans, believe.
This nomination is the chance for us to expose Obama’s agenda. In particular, skilled and well-preped questioners who are prepared to deal with the typical pro-abortion evasions could make clear Mr. Obama’s pro-infanticide and pro-abortion agenda. By proclaiming Judge Sotomayor as an Hispanic candidate, he has guaranteed that many Hispanics will be following the confirmation hearing as Mr. Obama’s unconscionable policies are elucidated. I know of no Hispanic Americans who are in favor or killing or abandoning children to starve or suffocate. Mr. Obama has advocated precisely that.
Should have read, “a predictably unintelligent pick by the President.”
More and more, Obama is an embarrassment to America.
Excellent! That's exactly the king of transparency we want from Obama.
No more stealth, or "closet" liberalism. She'll make the same decisions as Souter, but now people will see it for what really is, and the excuse for "Republican / Bush nominee" can no longer be made.
1. Birth Certificate: Could you please provide us a copy of your long form birth certificate?
2. Birth Certificate: Have you ever provided a long form birth certificate to any college when you applied or to any employer when required to do so?
3. College Records: Could you please release your college records to us and to the public?
The affirmative action president chooses an affirmative action USSC candidate? Surprise, surprise!
Obama was an Affirmative Action pick for President also!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.