Obama to Nominate Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court

Alberto Gonzalez had one of the great, classic responses at a congressional hearing:

"I don’t recall remembering”

He didn't ever seem to remember much of anything

If justice is "blind" what difference
does it make if a justice is hispanic,black, white, woman, man or whatever....as long as they protect
the Constitution of the United States.
Posted by: Monica

"IF"..... the qualifier of all things ...
the practicality of the framers in writing the constitution is proven throughout history, it is not a static document of rigid beliefs like the bible, it is a guide and foundation to a live and changing democracy.....

if one was 'protecting the constitution' early on in American history, non-whites and women lived without the benefits of the Const....
'all men are created equal' leaves out a lot of people, .....

as a separate branch of the govt., the judiciary must think for itself and decide if laws, no matter when written, apply in society today......

I'm sure you would disagree with this interpretation of the Constitution....

We think they [people of African ancestry] are . . . not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. . . ."
— Chief Justice Roger B. Taney,
speaking for the majority

"Miguel Estrada, US Court of Appeals for DC"

Had zero bench experience.

"Alberto Gonzalez, although not for the supreme court, and unjustly attacked non stop for years at that."

He should be attacked non stop. In fact I am glad he is so radioactive that no law firm will hire him.

His actions as attorney general did more damage to this country than any AG in memory.

When John Ashcroft delirious in his sick bed is the level headed one of the two, you know Alberto was garbage.

"Great Pick President Obama a Woman and Hispanic at that, Great Job Representing the Diversity of our country!"
==========================
Angie in Pa,

Leave it to you to immedialtely go the whole issue of "Diversity" first! I thought he was supposed t be nominating a person for the Supreme Court, Not the Census bureau!

As long as liberals like yourself are around, this country will NEVER move past classification of people in this manner!

I dont care what gender she is, what her ethinic background is. THE ONLY THING that matters is wether she is qualified and wether she truly can seperate interpreting the law and the Constitution from forming political policy.

That is where my beef with this pick is. The rest of what you jump up and down about is why the best people rarely end up in the positions we need them in.

If justice is "blind" what difference
does it make if a justice is hispanic,black, white, woman, man or whatever....as long as they protect
the Constitution of the United States.

I never said it was the supreme court. Is that your straw man argument. I said nomination.
posted by MNM
***************************
You responded with this "Dems had no problem blocking Bush's hispanic nomination." in a direct post regarding Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court. Any logical person would conclude you mean the Supreme Court not any hispanic nominated anytime, anywhere......

MNM:"I never said it was the supreme court. Is that your straw man argument. I said nomination. Miguel Estrada, US Court of Appeals for DC and Alberto Gonzalez, although not for the supreme court, and unjustly attacked non stop for years at that."

You implication was clear. And 27 lower court Hispanic justices were approved without problem from Democrats under Bush Jr, and the first Hispanic cabinet member was appointed by Bush Sr in 1988, again without a rabid partisan fight. Sorry if I do not find your odd cherry picking and careless (or blatantly deceptive) implication very convincing.

paul:"Would you care to cite a few valid examples of Republican party rhetoric and actions against LEGAL immigrants? "

Are you aware of Tom Tancredo's position regarding legal immigration and how he'd reform it? Just read his book and try to say he's just against illegals.

Or how about the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) bill debate? Regarding LEGAL immigrant childrens' access to health care, Senator John Ensign (R-NV) said: "It would seem to me that we are giving more incentives for folks to come to the United States, not just to participate in the American dream, but to get on the government dole. And I think this is exactly the wrong direction we should be going with this legislation."

Again, that was directly, explicitly, and clearly against policy to treat legal immigrants equally to native citizens.

Republicans haven't lost the immigrant vote because immigrants are stupid.

"President Bush (with the savvy guidance of Rove) was making a play towards bringing the Latino population into the Republican party's tent, but their rabid anti-immigrant scuttled any hopes of that when their rhetoric and actions clearly turned against legal immigrants too."
--------
What a pile of dem talking point hooey.
Cite the case, and make it something that can be checked, because surely such a claim is easily documented.
Of course lying is standard op for dems against republicans.

All of Bush's nominations are VERY well documented historical fact. Which of those three is Bush's "hispanic nomination" that "Dems had no problem blocking"?

Posted by: jhw539 | May 26, 2009 11:11:42 AM
-------
"Dems had no problem blocking Bush's hispanic nomination.This argument is a non starter."

I never said it was the supreme court. Is that your straw man argument. I said nomination.
Miguel Estrada, US Court of Appeals for DC
and
Alberto Gonzalez, although not for the supreme court, and unjustly attacked non stop for years at that.

It still preempts any attempt to claim republicans would vote Sotomeyer down due to hispanic heritage.

"President Bush (with the savvy guidance of Rove) was making a play towards bringing the Latino population into the Republican party's tent, but their rabid anti-immigrant scuttled any hopes of that when their rhetoric and actions clearly turned against legal immigrants too."

Would you care to cite a few valid examples of Republican party rhetoric and actions against LEGAL immigrants?

MNM, Judge Sotomayor didn't just say that she would have a different opinion. She actually 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.”

If a white judge had said that he or she would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina judge, there would be a call for that judge's impeachment. I am only pointing out the hypocrisy that already exists.

The vetting process has only just begun. However based on the early information that is coming out about Judge Sotomayor, I currently don't see anything that should disqualify her for being a U. S. Supreme Court Justice. I am a strong believer that the President of the United States--especially one elected by a majority of the electorate--should have his nominee confirmed UNLESS that nominee has demonstrated a clear propensity towards judicial activism. That is going beyond merely interpreting law and instead actually engaging in making law. I know that Judge Sotomayor once made a statement in a forum about the Court of Appeals being a place where "policy is made." However, she immediately backed away saying that she knows that "we don't make law."

the Truth:"MSM, stop lying. Cardozo was the first hispanic SC justice. Stop reprinting Dem talking points.
... That honor belongs to Herbert Hoover, who appointed Benjamin Cardozo to the Supreme Court in 1932. Cardozo served until 1938. Bush may in fact nominate the second Hispanic to the Supreme Court, but it's simply false that no justice on the court so far has been Hispanic. It's amazing that people are still reporting it, but no one seems to be calling them on this."

You can call away, but your definition of Hispanic does not match the long time documented one used by the census bureau or U.S. Office of Management and Budget. There is also the issue of Cardozo being at least a century removed even from Portugal.

But perhaps you should take your case directly to the US Hispanic community, the ultimate arbitrators of the question. Meanwhile, I suppose you think you should touch up on your Spanish before a trip to Portugal (just like it's important to know a bit of Latin before visiting Latin America!).

Great news for people who don't like the Constitution. Does this also mean that we will eventually just phase out Congress now that the Supreme Court will be making laws?

MSM, stop lying. Cardozo was the first hispanic SC justice. Stop reprinting Dem talking points.

Hispanic definition

His·panic (hi span?ik)

adjective

1. Spanish or Spanish-and-Portuguese
2. of or relating to Hispanics

Nominating Sonja will not make him the first president to nominate a Hispanic justice, contrary to the claims of almost every media outlet that talks about the possibility of a Hispanic justice. That honor belongs to Herbert Hoover, who appointed Benjamin Cardozo to the Supreme Court in 1932. Cardozo served until 1938. Bush may in fact nominate the second Hispanic to the Supreme Court, but it's simply false that no justice on the court so far has been Hispanic. It's amazing that people are still reporting it, but no one seems to be calling them on this.

Leftists never let facts get in the way of a false media blitz.

James Danley:"President Bush nominated Miguel Estrada--a Honduran immigrant--for the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in May 2001. For two years the Democrats blocked his nomination in committee. "

It should also be noted that Democrats supported Hispanic Bush appointees to the lower courts, with 27 - 10% of his nominations - confirmed (more than the 23 Clinton got confirmed).

President Bush (with the savvy guidance of Rove) was making a play towards bringing the Latino population into the Republican party's tent, but their rabid anti-immigrant scuttled any hopes of that when their rhetoric and actions clearly turned against legal immigrants too.

He implied a SCOTUS nominee.

President Bush nominated Miguel Estrada--a Honduran immigrant--for the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in May 2001. For two years the Democrats blocked his nomination in committee. When the Republicans regained control of the Senate in 2003 the Democrats filibustered his nomination. Mr. Estrada finally withdrew his nomination on Sep 4, 2003.

Monica:" Why is she hispanic?
Just because she speeks spanish?"

Uh, it's kinda the definition of hispanic commonly used. It is used to describe the culture and people of countries formerly ruled by Spain. Puerto Rico is one such area.

The U.S. Office of Management and Budget currently defines "Hispanic or Latino" as "a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race".

If the Supreme Court rules with "blind justice"...why do we need a Porta Rician, hispanic, black, white or whatever? If it is "blind justice" it won't matter what your etenticity. And, you can lie and say anyway you feel, but when you are on the bench you have 'empathy'. Think this lady is doing just that. Why is she hispanic?
Just because she speeks spanish? She is Porta Rician......