Soaps.com - MESSAGE BOARDS

i am very excited with obama's choice for supreme court justice, sonia sotomayor, from what i read, she sounds like she will bring allot to the table

I hope she proves to be a strong front against the conservatives, but from what I have read she won't(we all know what we read is true... )
What I do know from public record:
1. She is on record as saying SC is where law is made...I can see how commoners could draw this conclusion, but for one in her position to willingly say this on tape, scares me. SC is not where law is made, it is not where the people are represented, it is where past law is interpreted.
2. She dismissed a case for 4 firefighters in Detroit who kept getting passed on for "lesser qualified minorites." She commented after the dismissal that she dismissed it b/c white people cannot be discriminated against. Now, maybe these white firefighters did not have a case. Maybe they just sucked at their job. but to dismiss it and say that publicly...and no one cares, dems or repubs alike.
3.She made her way for herself from a poor family, she must be very smart, so maybe there is some potential for her to smarten up and watch what she says on record.

Suffice it to say I am not as hopeful as you.

I like your new kitty

i think i found a rebuttal when i googled her, check it out

Moreover, according to NBC News justice correspondent Pete Williams' report from earlier that day, "[E]ven some conservatives and followers of strict constructionism have said that [Sotomayor] was only stating the obvious: that trial judges, district court judges, decide only the cases before them, and that appeals courts, because they are the, you know, above the other courts, do set policy; they do make precedent that governs the other courts." Indeed, the Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States (2005) notes that federal appellate courts do in fact have a "policy making" role.

www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/27/60
-reversal-of-sotomayor-rulings-gives-fodder-to-f/

If the link doesn't work, this is a Washington Times article from today titled "Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court."

The Supreme Court is set to hear an appeal of one of her decisions next month and many legal analysts predict the court will overturn one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision. Lovesit I believe this is the case regarding the firefighters you mentioned.


My main concern is that she is on tape saying that appeals courts, of which the Supreme Court is the end of the road, are where policy is made - which is false, assuming one is familiar with the Constitution & it's instructions for appeals courts. They don't write laws, they don't make policy - they interpret existing law, period.

OK, so I of course can't find the article that was accompanied with the link to her speech at Duke university saying the SC made the laws, but here is another article that references it.
www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/obama-announce-supreme-court-nominee-tuesday... /> To hear the speech yourself, I know youtube has it.

And just about every article about her talks about the firefighters she dismissed, which is now in the SC and is expected to be overturned.
Which leads to her 60% reversal rate. Granted, she has only 5 out of 380 cases out there, and 3 were overturned. So 2 out of 5 isn't good, but it isn't a total failure.
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/27/60-reversal-of-sotomayor-rulings-gives-... />
I did, however, find some more alarming facts abaout her, like her admitted bias to rule in favor or Latinos
www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=48601.
I just hope that at worst, she is the weak counterpart to the conservatives the dems fear
www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085

and at best, she is a strong opponent to the conservatives who stands by her interpretations based on the Constitution, not the people.

As for your article, I can totally see how we common folk think that way, even every day lawyers. We are not in the SC, and lawyers reference their rulings every day in hopes of turning their state ruling in their favor. So in that aspect, yes, SC makes policy. But that CANNOT be a factor in any SC judge when they rule, and it certainly CANNOT be a statement made by a potential/present SC judge.

All that said, she was originally appointed by George Bush, and is generally liked and respected. No person is going to be liked and agreed upon by everybody. If they were, well, like I said, they would not be representing a democracy. We can only wait and hope for the best from her.

I tried to find unbiased, verifyable, and reputable articles, but it was hard. Hope I found some you can believe in as legitimate. Its just so hard to find unbiased media, regardless of the side it comes from.

thank you both for the websites
sometimes you don't know what to believe, check this out

mediamatters.org/

lovesit, thanks for pointing out that the Supreme Court is not subject to affirmative action. I am white, female, & Christian and you know what - I am fine with Scalia, an Italian Catholic male, & Thomas, a black male who is also Catholic, making rulings. The idea that the court, & the people of the U.S., is better served b/c its positions are filled based on race, gender, etc. is absurd & dangerous.

I am a huge fan of the two white guys George W. appointed. Two things he got right.