Posted by
BrianR on Saturday, June 20, 2009 1:32:39 PM
Much has been written about Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court, but there are a couple of issues I find persuasive enough to convince me she’s not qualified to be confirmed to the position.
If you read this article you’ll find the following:
“Republicans had complained that Sotomayor initially omitted from the records she sent the Senate Judiciary Committee a report she signed urging the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund to oppose reinstitution of the death penalty in New York in the early 1980s.
“The report, which has since been provided, said, ‘Capital punishment is associated with evident racism in our society.’ It noted that African-Americans at the time made up 47 percent of death row inmates, but only 11 percent of the U.S. population.”
Using that same “logic”, we can make the following argument: males comprise a little less than 50 percent of American society, but almost 100 percent of inmates convicted of rape. Therefore, American society is clearly sexist in favor of females. Obviously, an absurd proposition, because the fact is that males commit virtually 100% of the rapes in this country.
The reality is that Blacks commit 52% of the homicides in this country according to the US Department of Justice (
DOJ report) and thus are actually statistically UNDER-REPRESENTED in the death row population.
Sotomayor’s “reasoning” in the referenced report clearly ignores simple facts and logic, instead relying on emotional rhetoric to find support for the liberal canard of institutionalized racism, in an effort to advance a major plank of the liberal agenda. Why would one think she wouldn’t continue to do the same while serving on the bench? She managed to find “racism” where none exists, just as Roe v. Wade managed to find a constitutional “right to privacy” that exists nowhere in the actual Constitution.
This bias in favor of the liberal agenda over proper judicial action is also clearly illustrated in her opinion in the case Maloney v. Cuomo. This case was decided several months after the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) had issued its finding in the case DC v. Heller. In his opinion for the majority (the operative and definitive aspect) Scalia clearly and specifically wrote that the precedent of Presser v. Illinois didn’t apply to the individual right to own handguns (at issue in the Maloney case):
"None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, 264–265, refutes the individual rights interpretation."
Scalia continues: "We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. ... But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home."
Sotomayor, however (and in complete defiance of Heller), wrote: “And to the extent that Heller might be read to question the continuing validity of this principle, we must follow Presser because where, as here, a Supreme Court precedent has direct application in a case, yet appears to rest on reasons rejected in some other line of decisions, the Court of Appeals should follow the case which [it] directly controls.”
In other words, Sotomayor is telling SCOTUS and Scalia that she’s refusing to follow the direction clearly set by the Heller case. This is judicial arrogance and activism of the highest and worst order.
The two issues I’ve raised in this essay, in and of themselves, are enough to convince me she’s not qualified to be confirmed to the Supreme Court. Frankly, I think they disqualify her from the bench at any level. I don’t have any idea why this hasn’t been raised as an objection to her appointment, but it hasn’t.
I would urge all my readers to contact their Senators, and make these points. And feel free to copy and paste this essay should you wish to do so.