Sonia Sotomayor explains her 'wise Latina' remark

The Politico ^

[Sub-Driver]

Sotomayor explains 'wise Latina' By: Manu Raju June 2, 2009 10:51 AM EST

Judge Sonia Sotomayor attempted to clarify her controversial remark Tuesday that a "wise Latina woman" could reach a "better" decision than a white male, telling Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy that "ultimately" and "completely" a judge should follow the law.

Leahy, who met privately with Sotomayor on Tuesday, said he usually doesn’t discuss what was said in private meetings with Supreme Court nominees.

But given the attacks that have been launched because of her remarks, Sotomayor gave Leahy clearance to give her response to the public.

Sotomayor told Leahy that what she meant is that people have different backgrounds but "there is only one law," and "ultimately and completely" she would follow the law.

Leahy didn't clarify whether Sotomayor acknowledged misspeaking, as even President Barack Obama has. Leahy said Sotomayor talked about her judicial philosophy, which can be guided by experiences but at the end of the day it comes down to rule of law.

The comments were the first response indirectly from Sotomayor since conservatives began attacking her as an activist judge — with some questioning whether she is racially biased. The Leahy meeting came on a whirlwind day for Sotomayor on Capitol Hill, where she’s meeting with several top senators in private meetings followed by photo ops.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who lunched with the nominee along with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said Sotomayor pointed out that her comments in the speech where she made this remark also referenced the fact that Brown v. Board of Education was decided by nine white males, and she argues that her speech should be considered in its broader context.

[Sub-Driver]

I smell a baloney sandwich......

[MattinNJ]

What I would pay to have someone ask her if she thought a wise latina woman could reach a better decision than an African American male.

[Paladin2]

Too late now.

[Vaquero]

that may be baloney that already passed through someone....but that ain’t baloney you smell.

[junta]

The supreme court is the holy grail of the left and they do not want this doofy woman to destroy its legitimacy. With the court in their hands they can rule this country like Cuba with phony elections.

[Tarpon]

I find what she said perfectly clear.

[VocalObserver]

Thank you Senator Leahy, I was starting to worry she really meant it.

[exist]

Ahmadinejad > Schumer

[ArrogantBustard]

Buddy, it ain’t baloney in that sandwich ...

[JRios1968]

Sotomayor told Leahy that what she meant is that people have different backgrounds but "there is only one law," and "ultimately and completely" she would follow the law.

As defined by HER.

[ozzymandus]

Oh, bullshit. She made a racist statement, and now an idiot like Leahey is defending her. She’s be better off without that moron’s “help”.

[Palladin]

She can’t defend or excuse that which is indefensible and inexusable.

Sotomayor is La Raza racist, pure and simple.

[a fool in paradise]

Sotomayor told Leahy that what she meant is that people have different backgrounds but "there is only one law," and "ultimately and completely" she would follow the law.

What about her nod and a wink in the guffaw filled lecture hall where she talked about judicial activism from the bench?

[dfwgator]

Here we go with, “What I meant was...”

[VocalObserver]

When does Graham meet with her?

[TheWasteLand]

She didn’t clarify her statement at all.

[Safrguns]

Sotomayor told Leahy that what she meant is that people have different backgrounds but "there is only one law," and "ultimately and completely" she would follow the law.

Sounds to me like she just repeated herself without the inferences to race... because if this sentence is an explanation of the one in question, they are related. How is a white male's background necessarily better or worse than a latino woman's? Didn't she just suggest here that a white male is less likely to "follow the law"???

[dalereed]

since she is a nenber of La Raza she is lying!!!

For the race everything, nothing for others!

[Servant of the Cross]

Pure b.s.

From Rich Lowry at NRO - How Sotomayor Misspoke:

"But of course. A few innocuous slips of the tongue made it seem that Sotomayor endorsed a racial essentialism when she really meant to associate herself with race neutrality and impartiality. If only she had chosen a few words more prudently, the entire unfortunate misunderstanding would have been avoided. It could happen to anyone, even in a 4,000-word lecture from a prepared text that is subsequently turned into a law-review article. Poor Sonia!"

"In the next sentence, she mused, “I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society.” Not again! This sentence was entirely misspoken and shouldn’t have been included in the text, since — as a straight-shooting, just-the-facts judge — Sotomayor naturally wondered no such thing."

"The day after Sotomayor’s lecture, Judge Richard Paez gave a talk rebutting her in strong terms: “We are required to apply the law fairly. . . . And so, although I am a Latino judge and there is no question about that — I am viewed as a Latino judge — as I judge cases, I try to judge them fairly. I try to remain faithful to my oath.” Oddly enough, that is precisely what Sotomayor meant to say — if only she hadn’t misspoken."