About Sonia Sotomayor

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.

The testimony of firefighters Frank Ricci and Ben Vargas today was incredibly powerful:  they were able to speak directly to the American people and explain how hard they worked, and the sacrifices their families made, to enable them to succeed on the firefighter promotion test in New Haven, only to have their claims thrown out by Judge Sotomayor without a legal explanation why.

Republican Senators exposed Sotomayor's weaknesses on issues that will be costly in the long run for red and purple state Democrats:  the right to bear arms, taxpayer funding of abortion, racial preferences, property rights, using foreign and international law to intepret the Constitution, and making policy from the bench.

Judge Sotomayor testified that, as a judge, she explains her application of the law to the facts so that the parties will understand it.  The testimony of Vargas and Ricci squarely contradicted that.

Judge Sotomayor's defense of her actions in the firefighter case do not square with the record in the case;  for example, she claimed that the firefighters filed a petition for rehearing, portraying her attempt to bury their claims as nothing out of the ordinary.  It was very out of the ordinary, and she would have succeeded in burying the claims if it were not for her fellow judge and Clinton appointee, Judge Jose Cabranes, reading about the firefighters in the newspaper.

####

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