Join the Discussion

Reply
Report this post

Susan, When I served on a jury, I had to swear to leave my biases behind. How can a Supreme Court justice profess that her background and the biases she brings with them make her arrive at better judgments?

Reply
Report this post

I was under the impression that the legislative branch made the laws and that if a law was needed that branch of government was tasked with that responsibility. Our judges were to insure that the laws fell within the body of the written laws. The judicial branch was to be the weakest of the three branches due to the concept of "rule by the people". After 7 years at university (including 2 graduate years at USC) my fear is that as I become "more educated" the more egotistical and "self important I've become. I'm afraid that the judiciary has far exceeded the bounds of reasonable egos. An active judicial system frightens me. A cabal of liberal trained activists jurist terrifies me. A group of students accepted to these institutions of learning based on "affirmative action" programs is downright dangerous. I propose we honor the intent of the Constitution by insisting that the Legislature (through the people) make the laws or amend the Constitution if required and keep the judges away from usurping power from the people. I propose that the judiciary keep their "blindfolds" on and leave the their life stories to the social workers and daytime television.

Reply
Report this post

Game, set, match... great comment Lesley. Susan, there are two problems in play... I understand your argument about setting policy to a limited degree, but you missed a few key points. 1) Yes, in your example about the 4th amendment, the telephone has not been invented, but that is not the issue, the amendment is about right to privacy, not technology. 2) Of larger concern is the basis of experience being somehow better than a "white man". That is out and out, pure and simple racism. Definition of racism: "is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race." If what she said isn't racist, then I certainly don't know what is. The headline on Yahoo says "Obama: Efforts against Sotomayor twisting her words, will fail." Interesting, her words, and the full video offering their context with her saying them is on YouTube. Sorry, the sky is blue, just look. Darek

Reply
Report this post

Nomination is in trouble, as it should be. Thank God for the Internet. As Darek says, I can go to YouTube watch the video and listen to her comments. Without the Internet and the availability of information of which we can read, see, and now view, we are at the mercy of so called reporters and their biases (yes, they have them!). I'd much rather come to conclusions based upon the original source and raw materials as opposed to processed info. This capability alone is what is causing so many see through the biases of the once respected newspapers like the New York Times. Obama is fighting a losing battle, you cannot dispute her words, they are there for all to see.

Reply
Report this post

Re: Lesley Barnard;... Ma'am; to answer your question; Law is a form of relationship... If law does not work for the people it does not work...It is easy enough to say that the Parlement makes the law, and justice has no part of the work of justices... What foolish bunk is that??? Some one has to judge the law as well as judge the people, and that must be an assortment of people, all with varied experiences of life, even if that means being a woman, or a black, or hispanic...If the Law is made by fossilized white men, and is judged by fossilized white men; what are the chances, realistically, that the fossils will find some flaw in the law???The fact of that matter is that our constitution is not the ten commandments...It was not handed down by God on high...It has already proven itself in many instances to be a failed document, and it has cost us one civil war, and may cost another before it is finally trashed for good and all... If I may offer a simple personal opinion: Not one of those people can see beyond the failure of the form we call law... All of those people have in common the fact that they are millionaires, and often millionaires many times over... They cannot escape the forms we call wealth, and property...Not one of them will ever abondon their familiar forms, or realize that all forms must serve the relationship... The relationship we call America is in desparate agony...It is not healthy...It is barely alive; and yet people hold to the form while the relationship dies around them... This problem is no new problem... Forms have often failed humanity while people clung to them in desparation... Yet; humanity always progresses by changing forms... Jefferson said as much in the declaration in his statement of forms...People hate change, and resist change, but eventually they must change because they cannot change their basic requirements from life... There is your base line... We will change when we must; but some people will never recognize the need for change, and they will never change their forms... I cannot say if Mrs. Sotomayor can see through her forms, but I expect she will see through them better than any white man...Thanks...Sweeney

Reply
Report this post

Re: Darek;...What you say about racism is snonsense, and wrong... For example: I have read anthropology and history by the yard... I have read about Native Americans by the yard, and lived beside them, and worked with many on the iron... Yet, I would not dare tell you, or any native American what it feels like to be a Native American for even a moment...To say I know something about it...To say I can imagine... All this is nothing... We have unique experiences of life which may be superficially similar, but are never the same... One can doubt even how much Mrs. Sotomayor's experiences are like those of other Hispanics, or Peurto Ricans, or Americans, or Women... One thing is certain... How ever disimilar her experience has been compared to others like her, they are heads and tails above what those white men on the court have experienced... There is some point where people must know, and no longer imagine.... We really cannot know what it is to suffer injustice, discrimination, or injury by the failure of law unless we have been there, and then the experience is everything but hypothetical... As one English Jurist said: There are no imaginary cases... The more real has been the experience of the judge, the less inclined he is to suffer fools or foolishness in silence... Now, understand; our court is not representative... The ancient Greek Supreme Court had one member for ever two hundred and fifty citizens... And here we are like so many geese running down this woman because she is representative... When did that become a disqualification??? Are we afraid some one will fix the law???That is like Carlin's comment about why they lock rest room doors...Are they afraid some one will clean them??? The thing could not get more worser...The only arguement is between thems that wants more medicine, and those who want more illness...No one likes the situation as it stands...So something has to give...Thanks...Sweeney

Reply
Report this post

Much ado about nothing. Sotomayor said she "would hope..." So if we want to argue over this one sentence we should note that "hope" does not equal "strongly believe". End of story. Le's move on. Do Republicans/conservatives really want to risk alienating Latinos over this clearly qualified nominee for the SC?

Reply
Report this post

We are all products of our environment. If a person's environment includes a top-grade education and years of judicial experience, it would make her more qualified to be on the Supreme Court than most of her detractors.

Reply
Report this post

>> What you say about racism is snonsense, and wrong... << The definition was taken from the dictionary. >> Regarding native American's << My relatives are native American's. Actually, so am I, I was born here! Don't lose sight of the fact that the legislature sets the law (i.e., policy!!!!) not judges, judges apply it. Much of the argument I see is wrapped up in emotion, and facts. Law is about facts. (I have several relatives from Boston, believe me, I have witnessed first hand many liberal arguments founded in emotion, not facts. As an engineer it's easy for me, but for many this in not.) 2+2 = 4 no matter how badly one feels is should be 5.

Reply
Report this post

James: >>When did that become a disqualification???<< When she doesn't understand the role of judges, and says racist things. Like I said about Lesley's comment "Game, set, match... great comment." It's really not that complicated.

Reply
Report this post

Definition of racism "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race" (Merriam-Webster www.m-w.com)..... Sotomayor's comment "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".