El Presidente Elige Sonia Sotomayor

[AustinHoya03]

www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98DVTAO3&show_article=1

[TC]

This confirmation is going to have all the suspense of a Globetrotters/Generals matchup.

[thebin]

“I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life."
--John Roberts

Would he have been confirmed if he said that? No, he would have been more likely to have been burnt at the stake for saying that. He didn't say that of course. But....

“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,” said Judge Sotomayor, who is now considered to be near the top of President Obama’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees.

[kchoya]

May 26, 2009 11:01:54 GMT -5 thebin said:

“I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life."
--John Roberts

Would he have been confirmed if he said that? No, he would have been more likely to have been burnt at the stake for saying that. He didn't say that of course. But....

“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,” said Judge Sotomayor, who is now considered to be near the top of President Obama’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees.

Clearly, with her time at Princeton and Yale, and as a long-time federal judge, she brings a much different background to the Court than past justices.

[thebin]

Any annoying sticklers for the Constitution in our Senate might have a small problem with this too....

This month, for example, a video surfaced of Judge Sotomayor asserting in 2005 that a “court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds: “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I’m — you know.”

www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html

[Bando]

Oh woe! Pity the poor, downtrodden white male! Pueto Rican women growing up in housing projects get all the breaks!

[SoCalHoya]

I don't think "Directors Daily" had a heads-up on the nomination this morning, but oddly enough what they sent to me this morning on corporate governance was oddly relevant.

..."is there any evidence that diverse groups make better decisions? Yes, according to an excellent article by Lisa Fairfax, a law professor at the University of Maryland." Fairfax "cites studies that show heterogeneous groups make higher-quality decisions because of their disparate backgrounds." This is despite the fact that "female and ethnic minority directors often come from the same educational and class background as the white males."

I'd argue that what occurs on boards of directors would apply to the Supreme Court as well. And yes, I think that the paths that most white males take to get to Princeton and Yale are far different than what Ms. Sotomayor faced. And I think that different path matters.

[Elvado]

Good for Judge Sotomayor. I hope the confirmation process returns to a more traditional advise and consent process rather than the bloodsport ushered in by Messrs. Kennedy and Biden with the Bork hearings.

The President has made a qualified selection. It is his choice to make and elections do have consequences.

[SFHoya99]

May 26, 2009 11:01:54 GMT -5 thebin said:

“I would hope that a wise white male with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life."
--John Roberts

Would he have been confirmed if he said that? No, he would have been more likely to have been burnt at the stake for saying that. He didn't say that of course. But....

“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,” said Judge Sotomayor, who is now considered to be near the top of President Obama’s list of potential Supreme Court nominees.

I don't think he would have been burned at the stake for saying that. It's a little odd, granted, since there's no reason for him to say that. But is either statement wrong?

[AustinHoya03]

May 26, 2009 11:32:01 GMT -5 Bando said:

Oh woe! Pity the poor, downtrodden white male! Pueto Rican women growing up in housing projects get all the breaks!

I don't see anyone arguing that Sotomayor received any breaks, I only see people arguing with things she has said. I don't like either of the statements thebin quoted, but I'm not sure one's judicial philosophy can be surmised from flippant remarks. I'd like to read a few of her opinions (which I plan on doing this afternoon) rather than taking a stand based on the partisan talking points being put out by both Republicans and Democrats, which are now being faithfully reported by the national media.

I also agree with kc that it is somewhat ridiculous that all the recent nominees have received both their undergraduate and law degrees from Ivy League institutions. A Hispanic nominee is, in my opinion, exciting and long overdue. However, let's not forget that most Ivy League schools had quotas on minorities and Catholics well into the 20th century. Many of Ms. Sotomayor's peers (in terms of race and age), probably equally as gifted, were turned away by the Ivies. If Obama wants someone with a history of personal struggle, why not one of these individuals, rather than a person for whom the doors of opportunity opened at age 18 and never closed?

[thebin]

I believe she would be the sixth catholic on the bench, so pls put that violin away.

[kchoya]

May 26, 2009 12:12:42 GMT -5 SoCalHoya said:

I don't think "Directors Daily" had a heads-up on the nomination this morning, but oddly enough what they sent to me this morning on corporate governance was oddly relevant.

..."is there any evidence that diverse groups make better decisions? Yes, according to an excellent article by Lisa Fairfax, a law professor at the University of Maryland." Fairfax "cites studies that show heterogeneous groups make higher-quality decisions because of their disparate backgrounds." This is despite the fact that "female and ethnic minority directors often come from the same educational and class background as the white males."

I'd argue that what occurs on boards of directors would apply to the Supreme Court as well. And yes, I think that the paths that most white males take to get to Princeton and Yale are far different than what Ms. Sotomayor faced. And I think that different path matters.

Your quote needs context. I think there's a big difference between nine justices trying to decide if a statute is constitutional versus a group of nine people trying to, say, come up with a new marketing plan or to design a new product. Some people would say applying one's experiences, feelings and personal views have more of a place in the latter, as opposed to the former.

[AustinHoya03]

May 26, 2009 13:42:55 GMT -5 thebin said:

I believe she would be the sixth catholic on the bench, so pls put that violin away.

No violins from me on that front. I'm simply stating that many Hispanics (by virtue of being both minorities and Catholic) did not have the Ivy League opportunities Ms. Sotomayor did.

If the nomination is based in large part on one's personal struggle, it is worth pointing out that many Hispanic attorneys and judges have likely endured far more struggle in their personal and professional lives than a person with degrees from Princeton and Yale.

[Cambridge]

Having had the pleasure of sitting in on a case run by the nominee, I can say she is rapier sharp and almost intimidatingly intelligent. She has a very solid reputation in NY.

[SoCalHoya]

The one thing that bothers me is that she's already caught "black robe disease." I saw her speak about 8 years ago and was impressed with her eloquence and ability to relate complex themes to her audience in a simple manner. But this morning? Maybe it was just nerves.

[TC]

May 26, 2009 12:57:08 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

I also agree with kc that it is somewhat ridiculous that all the recent nominees have received both their undergraduate and law degrees from Ivy League institutions. A Hispanic nominee is, in my opinion, exciting and long overdue. However, let's not forget that most Ivy League schools had quotas on minorities and Catholics well into the 20th century. Many of Ms. Sotomayor's peers (in terms of race and age), probably equally as gifted, were turned away by the Ivies. If Obama wants someone with a history of personal struggle, why not one of these individuals, rather than a person for whom the doors of opportunity opened at age 18 and never closed?

How many judges on the Appeals Court have Ivy League backgrounds (vs. those that don't)?

I'd buy the argument that the Court should have members that have backgrounds other than being serving the Circuit Court of Appeals before buying the argument that the Supreme Court is too ivy-heavy and out-of-touch. I think Obama probably made a smart move though - a candidate not from the Appeals Court would be attacked on Miers lines no matter how qualified they are, and nominating a judge just because they didn't attend a prestigious school seems like a strange policy to me.

[kchoya]

May 26, 2009 14:45:50 GMT -5 TC said:

May 26, 2009 12:57:08 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

I also agree with kc that it is somewhat ridiculous that all the recent nominees have received both their undergraduate and law degrees from Ivy League institutions. A Hispanic nominee is, in my opinion, exciting and long overdue. However, let's not forget that most Ivy League schools had quotas on minorities and Catholics well into the 20th century. Many of Ms. Sotomayor's peers (in terms of race and age), probably equally as gifted, were turned away by the Ivies. If Obama wants someone with a history of personal struggle, why not one of these individuals, rather than a person for whom the doors of opportunity opened at age 18 and never closed?

How many judges on the Appeals Court have Ivy League backgrounds (vs. those that don't)?

I'd buy the argument that the Court should have members that have backgrounds other than being serving the Circuit Court of Appeals before buying the argument that the Supreme Court is too ivy-heavy and out-of-touch. I think Obama probably made a smart move though - a candidate not from the Appeals Court would be attacked on Miers lines no matter how qualified they are, and nominating a judge just because they didn't attend a prestigious school seems like a strange policy to me.

There are plenty of trial judges, practicing lawyers and academics out there that would be qualified.

And no one is suggesting the Teleprompter should tell Obama to nominate someone just because they didn't attend Yale/Harvard/Princeton. The point was brought up, in reference to Judge Sotomayor's hard scrabble life, to point out that for the past [almost] 40 years, she's been attending an Ivy League school, working in a Madison Avenue law firm, or been on the federal bench.

Finally, she's not even the best high jumper in her family.

[AustinHoya03]

May 26, 2009 14:45:50 GMT -5 TC said:

I'd buy the argument that the Court should have members that have backgrounds other than being serving the Circuit Court of Appeals before buying the argument that the Supreme Court is too ivy-heavy and out-of-touch. I think Obama probably made a smart move though - a candidate not from the Appeals Court would be attacked on Miers lines no matter how qualified they are, and nominating a judge just because they didn't attend a prestigious school seems like a strange policy to me.

First, there are plenty of prestigious schools (including GU) that are non-Ivies.

Second, is the policy of nominating a qualified jurist with a different educational background than the current nominees really any different than nominating a qualified jurist based in part on gender or race? I really don't see much of a distinction if we indeed have a goal of having a diverse and inclusive Court.

For the record, here's the educational bio info for the current Justices:

Roberts: Harvard/Harvard
Alito: Princeton/Yale
Breyer: Stanford/Harvard/Harvard
Ginsburg: Cornell/Harvard/Columbia
Kennedy: Stanford/Harvard
Scalia: Georgetown/Harvard
Souter: Harvard/Harvard
Stevens: U. Chicago/Northwestern
Thomas: Holy Cross/Yale

14 of the 20 diplomas (70%) held by SCOTUS Justices are from Ivy League schools. Stevens is the only Justice without an Ivy League diploma. He's also the only Justice that didn't receive his law degree from an Ivy. That's pretty Ivy-heavy, IMO.

ON EDIT: It should be noted that this is not a criticism of Judge Sotomayor -- I've been impressed with the opinions I've read so far. It is a criticism of the idea that acheiving diversity with this nomination must be mainly focused on race/gender. It has been my experience in the legal profession that where one went to law school has little bearing on one's ability to practice. Some of the best attorneys and judges I know chose to forgo an Ivy League education in favor of lower tuition/scholarships at public universities. As I said above, I'm pleased as hell the Court is getting a Hispanic and becoming more diverse in terms of gender and race, but I hope that Obama's next pick will be someone with, say, double degrees from UCLA who has excelled in his/her field.

[SoCalHoya]

From my perspective, by nominating a Latina, Obama was politically obligated to pick someone with a similar educational pedigree to the rest of the bench. Without it, the average Joe would infer some sort of modified criteria taken by the Obama administration. By having Sotomayor do so well in the Ivy League, she proved that not only could a Latina hold her own with the well-heeled white crowd, a Latina could destroy them on their home court.

[TC]

May 26, 2009 15:37:41 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

First, there are plenty of prestigious schools (including GU) that are non-Ivies.

You're kind of missing my point. If you're going to only pick appeals court judges (and every justice currently serving was appeals court judge) and complain that there are too many Ivy educated judges (which I'm not sure is really a problem - how much difference is there really in backgrounds of someone who went to University of Chicago and Dartmouth?), then you need to start with making the appeals court judge pool conform to your strange anti-Ivy bias, rather than just declaring that the Supreme Court needs some non-Ivy educated people.