About Sonia Sotomayor

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.

Vice President Joe Biden offered an exuberant endorsement of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor at a White House event Tuesday but some legal analysts believe he went too far by suggesting she would rule in favor of police if confirmed.

Flanked by a dozen District of Columbia police officers, Biden said Sotomayor, a former prosecutor, could be counted on to support law enforcement while on the high court.

"As you do your job, know that Judge Sotomayor has your back as well. And throughout this nominating process, I know you'll have her back," Biden said.

"I think what Biden said was foolish," said Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University who is a prominent legal ethicist. "She's not there to 'have their back.' She's there to interpret the law as she sees fit. . .

"It'll be embarrassing to her when she learns of it," Gillers said. "Biden crosses the line when he starts representing to interest groups that she would be voting in their favor."

Sotomayor was not present at the event, which took place at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in the White House complex.

The president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, John Wesley Hall, complained that Biden's comment made it sound like she would overlook police misconduct.

"To say that a judge 'has your back' is an activist judge," Hall said. "They're raising doubts for everybody who's concerned about the Bill of Rights. . . .'She's got your back' is just the worst possible thing he could have said."

But another legal ethics specialist, Steven Lubet of Northwestern, said he was not troubled by Biden's remarks. "If Judge Sotomayor had said that, perhaps [it would be problematic], but the fact that her supporters think she's more disposed toward law enforcement does not suggest bias. Everybody's in favor of law enforcement, no one's opposed to law enforcement," Lubet said. "This lacks the sort of specificity that would suggest bias."

White House officials, who asked not to be named, defended Biden's remark.

"This is not a statement pre-judging any case she might hear. It is a statement about the record and experience she will bring to the Court," one aide said. "What the VP said was entirely appropriate and not the least bit improper."

Biden and other speakers at the event highlighted Sotomayor's experience as a district attorney in New York before she was named to the federal bench. "She gets it She gets what you do every single day, day in and day out. She gets that one drug dealer on a corner, one rapist in a park is one too many and can terrorize and devastate a neighborhood," Biden said. "And she has a record to prove that she gets it."

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