“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would....

[jmichna]

Hey, Claire McCaskill: Meet Clarence Thomas
By Michelle Malkin • May 26, 2009 11:29 AM

On Fox News Channel this morning, Sen. Claire McCaskill dutifully read her “compelling personal story” talking points and hyped Sonia Sotomayor’s compelling personal background while whitewashing her legal record. (RCP Video has the clip here.)

Incredibly, McCaskill was not aware that Sotomayor had said “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.”

When FNC anchor Jane Skinner asked her about Sotomayor’s words, McCaskill tried to claim that someone else had made the statement.

Is Sen. McCaskill that clueless or that deceitful?

The Democrat senator went out to claim that the Supreme Court has no members who have grown up in poverty and overcome extreme hardships. “That’s something new,” McCaskill argued.

I suggest she read Justice Clarence Thomas’s memoir before she open her mouth again.

Once again, Democrats send the identity politics-marinated message that the experiences and “compelling personal stories” of minorities don’t count if those minorities stray from the liberal plantation.

Celebrate diversity — as long as you pledge allegiance to the Left for life.
***
Drinking game: If you take a shot every time you hear the phrase “compelling life story” today, you should be out by lunch.

The Anchoress rips the Lifestyle Network-flavored coverage of the SCOTUS announcement today.
Posted in: Supreme Court

"Celebrate diversity — as long as you pledge allegiance to the Left for life."

Yep...

And here’s the rundown on Obama’s SCOTUS choice from Wendy Long at the Judicial Confirmation Network:

Memorandum
TO: JCN Members and Interested Parties
FROM: Wendy Long, Counsel to JCN
DATE: May 26, 2009
RE: Obama Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor

• President Obama has threatened to nominate liberal judicial activists who will indulge their left-wing policy preferences instead of neutrally applying the law. In selecting Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his Supreme Court nominee, President Obama has carried out his threat.

• Judge Sotomayor will allow her feelings and personal politics to stand in the way of basic fairness. In a recent case, Ricci v. DeStefano, Sotomayor sided with a city that used racially discriminatory practices to deny promotions to firefighters. The per curiam opinion Sotomayor joined went so far out of its way to bury the firefighters’ important claims of unfair treatment that her colleague, Judge Jose Cabranes, a Clinton appointee, chastised her.

o According to Judge Cabranes, Sotomayor’s opinion “contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at he core of this case” and its “perfunctory disposition rests uneasily with the weighty issues presented by this appeal.” Even the liberal Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen expressed disappointment with the case, stating, “Ricci is not just a legal case but a man who has been deprived of the pursuit of happiness on account of race.”

o Sotomayor’s terrible decision in Ricci is under review by the Supreme Court and an opinion is expected by the end of June.

• Sotomayor readily admits that she applies her feelings and personal politics when deciding cases. In a 2002 speech at Berkeley, she stated that she believes it is appropriate for a judge to consider their “experiences as women and people of color,” which she believes should “affect our decisions.” She went on to say in that same speech “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” She reiterated her commitment to that lawless judicial philosophy at Duke Law School in 2005 when she stated that the “Court of Appeals is where policy is made.”

• The poor quality of Sotomayor’s decisions is reflected in her terrible record of reversals by the Supreme Court.

• Sotomayor is a favorite of far left special interest groups. In addition to her record as a hard left judicial activist, Sotomayor has been recommended for the Supreme Court by Nan Aron of the very liberal Alliance for Justice, who stated in a 2004 memo to the Senate Judiciary Committee that Sotomayor had “been through an initial vetting and fit into the criteria that we believe should be the standard for any Supreme Court justice.”

• The White House is sure to argue that Sotomayor is a “bipartisan pick” because Bush 41 appointed her to the district court: President George H.W. Bush nominated Sotomayor in 1991 only because the New York senators had forced on the White House a deal that enabled Senator Moynihan to name one of every four district court nominees in New York. In 1998, 29 Republican senators voted against President Clinton’s nomination of Sotomayor to the Second Circuit.

"...the “Court of Appeals is where policy is made.” That's funny... I thought the Legislative branch of the government was where laws were made, and the Judicial branch where those Laws were interpreted and upheld.

“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.” Not equal before the Law... but some more equal and deserving than others. "Justice" becomes what the judges perceive it to be, rather than what the law dictates.

[psc]

This is going to be very interesting...

Thanks for posting.

[longtalltechsan]

Lets face it. I will be absolutely shocked if this woman is not confirmed. This is the pick that dems have been wanting for years...a double minority. A woman and a hispanic woman at that. Add to that there are probably several republicans that don't have the cojones to vote against a hispanic woman. The confirmation hearings may be very tense, but many of those critical of her will still vote for her saying that they are satisfied with her answers so on and so forth.

[jmichna]

More by Sotomayor:

Sotomayor Video: Judges Make Policy, Latinas Better Than Whites

Tuesday, May 26, 2009 9:35 AM By: Kenneth D. Williams

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 ...” Regarding Sotomayor's chances to avoid a filibuster of her nomination, Senator Orrin Hatch told Politico, “I'll tell you one thing, I'm not very happy about judges who will substitute their own policy preferences for what the law really is; who think that they can run the country from the bench when they actually have a limited role. And that role is to interpret the laws made by those who have to stand for reelection." Despite Hatch's misgivings, Democratic Senators Charles E. Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York sent a personal letter to President Barack Obama asking him to appoint a Latino to fill the next vacancy on the United States Supreme Court Back in April. “It’s long overdue that a Latino sit on the United States Supreme Court. Sonia Sotomayor and Ken Salazar are two candidates who would make outstanding justices. They have top-notch legal minds, years of experience, moderate approaches to the law, and would make history by being the first Latino on the court,” Senator Schumer said. "We are fortunate in New York State to have jurists of the caliber and intellect that Judge Sotomayor has exhibited during a lifelong career of service to the bench. As an accomplished jurists, as a woman, and as a Latina she would bring to the United States Supreme Court a much needed voice. We must be committed to diversity on our nation’s highest bench. These candidates will restore the balance that we so desperately need on the Court,” Senator Gillibrand said.

[Carnivorous]

Terrible record of reversals? Cite statistics, please! I would be surprised if she was out of line with other appellate judges.

[ForTehNguyen]

did anyone else find this line funny ya know?

This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds: “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. I’m — you know.”

[scout06]

To believe that race or gender is an important asset in the making of a Judge, specifically a SCOTUS, is to admit to racism and gender bias, IMO.

We're supposed to get a judge who is everyone's judge, not a hispanic leaning judge or woman leaning judge or a white male rightwing radical leaning Judge. Unless the politic of diversity ends soon, America as we know it and knew it are gone forever.

I can't believe I gave 21 years of my life for this crap!

[jmichna]

Originally Posted by Carnivorous

Terrible record of reversals? Cite statistics, please! I would be surprised if she was out of line with other appellate judges.

Better take that up with Wendy Long:

Memorandum
TO: JCN Members and Interested Parties
FROM: Wendy Long, Counsel to JCN
DATE: May 26, 2009
RE: Obama Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor

JCN Statement on nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court

May 26, 2009

Wendy E. Long, counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network, on nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court:

"Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important than the law as written. She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench.

"She reads racial preferences and quotas into the Constitution, even to the point of dishonoring those who preserve our public safety. On September 11, America saw firsthand the vital role of America's firefighters in protecting our citizens. They put their lives on the line for her and the other citizens of New York and the nation. But Judge Sotomayor would sacrifice their claims to fair treatment in employment promotions to racial preferences and quotas. The Supreme Court is now reviewing that decision.

"She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court."

Contact info:
The Judicial Confirmation Network
PO Box 3141
Manassas, VA 20108
info@judicialnetwork.com

Also:
To schedule an interview with a spokesperson from the Judicial Confirmation Network, please contact Megan Erhardt (ext. 136) or Peter Robbio (ext. 116) at 703-683-5004.

[Carnivorous]

Originally Posted by scout06

To believe that race or gender is an important asset in the making of a Judge, specifically a SCOTUS, is to admite to racism and gender bias, IMO.

We're supposed to get a judge who is everyone's judge, not a hispanic leaning judge or woman leaning judge or a white male rightwing radical leaning Judge. Unless the politic of diversity ends soon, America as we know it and knew it are gone forever.

I can't believe I gave 21 years of my life for this crap!

Was that your opinion when Thomas was nominated? Many people thought (and still do) that he was given preference because of his race. Not necessarily that he's a bad judge, but that his color was an asset in deciding who to nominate.

[scout06]

Originally Posted by Carnivorous

Was that your opinion when Thomas was nominated? Many people thought (and still do) that he was given preference because of his race. Not necessarily that he's a bad judge, but that his color was an asset in deciding who to nominate.

Yep, that was and still is my opinion. What does that have to do with what this "Judge" said? My history or stances on appointments is not what's important here. What is important is that this woman was nominated because she shows favoritism rather than justice in her courts because she allows her race and gender (by her own words) affect her decisions concerning law. This being the case, she cannot provide fair and just decisions on any matter,IMO.