About Sonia Sotomayor

Published August 6, 2009 | 12:44 pm

Sotomayor Nomination: Wrap-Up and Going Forward

To: JCN Members and Interested Parties
From: Gary Marx, Executive Director, and Wendy E. Long, Counsel
Date: August 6, 2009

Re: Sotomayor Nomination: Wrap-Up and Going Forward

The nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor has provided some unexpected silver linings in the long-term fight for judicial restraint and responsibility. It would have been hard to imagine, little more than two months ago, that this first Obama nomination to the Supreme Court would produce:

• The most unpopular confirmed Supreme Court nominee ever in polls.

According to prominent nationwide polls, fewer than half of Americans supported the Sotomayor nomination and just as many opposed it. Even Hispanic voters were almost equally divided, even though she was the first Latina nominee to the Supreme Court, and according to another poll, the Obama support rating among Hispanics actually dropped 7% the week after the Sotomayor hearings. The Rahm Emanuel /Obama White House hardball identity politics play, in other words, did not work.

As Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.) noted, Judge Sotomayor’s life story was “inspiring and compelling,” but so was that of Miguel Estrada, whom the Democrats smeared and filibustered seven times in order to prevent the ascendancy of a Hispanic Republican nominee to the Supreme Court. The reason for Judge Sotomayor’s low approval ratings are that Americans of all races and ethnicities know the real test of a judge is not ethnicity or background but the ability to be impartial and to dispense equal justice under law.

Published July 28, 2009 | 11:52 am

Zogby poll finds strong opposition to Sotomayor confirmation

TO:         JCN MEMBERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES
FROM:     WENDY E. LONG, COUNSEL
GARY A. MARX, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
DATE:     JULY 28, 2009
RE:         ZOGBY POLL FINDS STRONG OPPOSITION TO SOTOMAYOR
CONFIRMATION

Published July 27, 2009 | 12:02 pm

VERDICT ON SOTOMAYOR IS "NO"

TO: JCN MEMBERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES
FROM: WENDY E. LONG, COUNSEL
GARY A. MARX, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
DATE: JULY 27, 2009
RE: SONIA SOTOMAYOR: THE FINAL VERDICT IS A RESOUNDING “NO”

Based on our pre-hearing examination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s record, we asked Senators to oppose her nomination. After completing our review of Judge Sotomayor’s hearing testimony and written responses to Senators’ written questions, we are today reiterating our recommendation that Senators vote “no” on her nomination.

Published July 17, 2009 | 8:33 am

End of Day 4 Statement on Sotomayor Hearings

Judge Sotomayor stuck to her John Roberts imitation today, refusing to endorse the Obama standard of judging and the view of the Constitution that he was so confident that she shared. It's hard to imagine how any future Obama court nominee will be able to defend his vision of judging based on what is in a judge's "heart" after Sotomayor rejected it so forcefully.

Published July 14, 2009 | 6:58 pm

Two Faces of Sonia Sotomayor

Statement by Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network.
The first face is the one we know from three decades of her life as a lawyer and judge. The second face is like a mask she donned today, and can only be chalked up to a "confirmation conversion": she is saying things today that are irreconcilable with what she's said for the last 30 years.
She denies to Sen. Graham that she adheres to the Legal Realism school, yet she wrote a law review article embracing it.

Published June 29, 2009 | 9:39 pm

Not Even One Justice Approved Sotomayor In Ricci Case

Statement from Wendy E. Long, counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network, on U.S. Supreme Court decision in Ricci v. DeStefano:

"Frank Ricci finally got his day in court, despite the judging of Sonia Sotomayor, which all nine Justices of U.S. Supreme Court have now confirmed was in error.

"Usually, poor performance in any profession is not rewarded with the highest job offer in the entire profession.

Published June 17, 2009 | 8:00 pm

Judge Sonia Sotomayor supplemental response to Senate questionnaire

Dear Senators:

Unfortunately, even with the additional submissions of June 15, 2009, Judge Sotomayor s answers and document production to the Senate Judiciary Committee's questionnaire " and, accordingly, to the American people " are still incomplete.

Published June 16, 2009 | 8:00 pm

Belizean Grove: More Double Standards, More Double Talk

Thank goodness. Michael Kinsley hits the nail on the head this morning in the Washington Post about Sonia Sotomayor's membership in a discriminatory women's club:

Published June 10, 2009 | 11:48 am

Joe Biden pushes envelope with Sonia Sotomayor praise

From Politico:

“It’s something that’s certainly unprecedented in the annals of White House activity on Supreme Court nominations,” Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network said in a conference call with reporters. She called the event a “sideshow” aimed at “misleading” the public about Sotomayor’s judicial record.

Published June 10, 2009 | 10:35 am

Sotomayor questionnaire has glaring omissions

Last week, soon after the White House delivered Judge Sotomayor's Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire in what it billed as record time, it became clear that Judge Sotomayor had failed to disclose an important memo she wrote for the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF) arguing against the death penalty in New York.

"It now appears that she failed to disclose more than just that memo: the questionnaire contains many glaring omissions that would have given the Senate and the American public a better idea of who she is and how she approaches the law," said JCN counsel Wendy E. Long. "These omissions lead to the inescapable conclusion that the White House wants to rush through her nomination without giving Senators and the American people full transparency about Sotomayor's record."

Get The Facts

Learn More Here

What Others Are Saying

"President Obama abided by his dismal and lawless ‘empathy’ standard and, in his selection of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, picked a nominee whom he can count on to indulge her own liberal biases. Sotomayor’s outrageous shenanigans in Ricci v. DeStefano—the case now awaiting a ruling by the Supreme Court in the next four weeks or so—shows what the Obama “empathy” standard means in practice: disfavoring politically incorrect litigants, in this case firefighters who devoted their spare time and their scarce resources to study hard for and pass a promotional exam. See here for more on Sotomayor’s incoherent account of her selective empathy, here for her sorry record of Supreme Court reversals (a record made worse by the Court’s recent reversal of her ruling in the Riverkeepers case), and here for Jeffrey Rosen’s recounting of liberal concerns that Sotomayor just isn’t smart enough."
Ed Whelan, President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center
"The problem will soon arise, as it inevitably does for any judge in a court of last resort, of what happens in a particular case when the second factor of limited judicial role impartiality conflicts with empathy? When push comes to shove, will a Justice Sotomayor favor individuals over institutions, employees over corporations, the poor over the rich? My hope is that she will recognize that a judge is supposed to be objective, impartial, free from bias. When it comes to judging, impartiality must trump empathy."
Justice Raoul Cantero, former Florida Supreme Court Justice
"For all the President’s talk of finding ‘common ground,’ this appointment completely contradicts that hollow promise. Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s judicial philosophy undermines common ground. She is a radical pick that divides America. She believes the role of the Court is to set policy which is exactly the philosophy that led to the Supreme Court turning into the National Abortion Control Board denying the American people to right to be heard on this critical issue. This appointment would provide a pedestal for an avowed judicial activist to impose her personal policy and beliefs onto others from the bench at a time when the Courts are at a crossroad and critical abortion regulations – supported by the vast majority of Americans – like partial-birth abortion and informed consent laws lie in the balance."
Dr. Charmaine Yoest, Americans United for Life President & CEO
"President Obama's choice of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the U. S. Supreme Court is consistent with his ideological view supporting Supreme Court justices that rule based on personal feelings and political agenda, rather than a strict and disciplined adherence to the rule of law. While, as a woman who has been a lawyer for almost 25 years, I applaud his choice of a woman jurist for a seat on our nation's highest court, this does not allay my concerns about the impact this appointment will have on Supreme Court jurisprudence. It is imperative that our next Supreme Court Justice rule based on the law as it stands, blind to the emotional, cultural, or political appeal of the issues presented."
Leslie Hiner, Freedom for Educational Choice