Posted on 05/26/2009 1:06:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's pick to become the newest Supreme Court justice, is on the record with some controversial remarks about 'diversity,' 'judicial activism' and female judges vs. male judges.
For example, the New York Times reported that in 2001, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture, Sotomayor had this to say:
“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.”
“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said later, regarding non-white, female judges, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”
Also, there is a 2005 video of Sotomayor, speaking with potential law clerks, saying that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She added: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it ...”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
“Jurisprudence? We don’ need no steekin’ jurisprudence!” (We got empathy instead)
Here I thought a judges job was to interpret the laws as written. Silly ‘ol VPINTHEAK.
A wise Latina woman wouldnt have made a statement like she did. She is not wise.
need to make sure and tune Mark Levin in today.. he should have fun with this pick. ;=}
It doesn’t change her far left views but her parents were from Puerto Rico not Mexico
did she pay her taxes?
Laura Ingraham was on this early this morning,
especially Laura having been a law clerk to Justice Thomas.
” Mother Superior Supreme Sotomayor “ = Sister Souljah
Latino men (at least the many I know) are still provential in their attitude and opinion of women in society. Don’t kid yourself—they are, even though they keep their opinions generally to themselves! I fail to see where nominating a latina in lieu of a latino would have a huge influence in this demographic.
The Dems will probably submit this video to her confirmation committee.
“Albatross!”
Senator Biden was the first questioner. Instead of the softball questions he’d promised to ask, he threw a beanball straight at my head, quoting from a speech I’d given four years earlier at the Pacific Legal Foundation and challenging me to defend what I’d said. ”I find attractive the arguments of scholars such as Stephen Macedo, who defend an activist Supreme Court that would strike down laws restricting property rights.” That caught me off guard, and I had no recollection of making so atypical a statement, which shook me up even more. “Now, it would seem to me what you were talking about,” Senator Biden went on to say, “is you find it attractive the fact that they are activists and they would like to strike down existing laws that impact on restricting the use of property rights, because you know, that is what they write about.”Since I didn’t remember making the statement in the first place, I didn’t know how to respond to it. All I could say in reply was that “it has been some time since I have read Professor Macedo … But I don’t believe that in my writings I have indicated that we should have an activist Supreme Court.” It was, I knew, a weak answer. Fortunately, though, the young lawyers who had helped prepare me for the hearing had loaded all of my speeches into a computer and at the first break in the proceedings they looked this one up. The senator, they found, had wrenched my words out of context. I looked at the text and saw that the passage he’d read out loud had been immediately followed by two other sentences: “But the libertarian argument overlooks the place of the Supreme Court in a scheme of separation of powers. One does not strengthen self-government and the rule of law by having the non-democratic branch of the government make policy.” The point I’d been making was the opposite of the one that Senator Biden claimed I had made.
pp 235-236 of "My Grandfather's Son" by Clarence Thomas
Only melanometricity..
New York Times reported that in 2001, at the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture, Sotomayor had this to say:
“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.”
Before you dismiss that statement, read it this way: “I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latin woman who hasn’t lived that life.”
Blatant racism in the highest court in the land?
caught a clip of a law clerk of hers with Diane Sawyer,, the Judge is fantastic.. great to work for,
and a radio snippet on hannity, her kids are gone , she’s a work-a-holic and her staff are like her family.
Easy to frame the hypocrisy. Just move some words around and post.
“I would hope that a wise white man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life.”
“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences,” she said later, regarding white, male judges, “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”
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.