Blog for Democracy

Sotomayor it is

Did I call it or what?

President Barack Obama tapped federal appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, officials said, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice.

Linky

Get ready for a bunch of Repub talking points about Judge Sotomayor’s lack of judicial temperament.

Updated to add: Two things just occurred to me: 1) Did anyone question Scalia’s temperament when he was nominated? I can’t remember, but Nino is notoriously cranky; 2) Is it just coincidence that the talking point about the first Latina nominee is that she is “hot tempered”?

Posted

in

by

Jen B.

Tags:

Comments

35 responses to “Sotomayor it is”

  1. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    You and I have run into this problem several times before, and this is how I would respond to what you are saying, and let me start by saying let me go ahead and use left and right because I have so much training in comparative economics that liberal means right to me,

    I think what you can do is say that Roosevelt was to the left relative to his time, our time, or relative to other leaders, or relative even to himself (he campaigned and came to power as a balanced budget conservative, but changed as the times changed).

    It has to be relative to something, that’s how I think anyway.

    Now returning to Nixon, I think Nixon may’ve at the time been more conservative than his opponents, but if you’re trying to reference him in comparison to a judge he placed that’s on the court even now, you have to recognize that Nixon also was the guy that gave us the EPA, the food stamp program, who re-opened relations with China.

    In many ways he was the last real left or progressive President we had (now this exempts him basically wiping out a million people in Cambodia and all his SE Asia stuff), in that he created new, sincere and long-lasting social welfare bureaucracies.

    I think one reason I’m so set on the point is so that people can see how far to the right the parties have drifted (in some ways, not all), especially with respect to the fact that their constituencies are to the left of them on many issues (although not on some things like the death penalty, where we’ve moved right).

    I referenced polling in a blog post a few weeks ago that showed roughly half of constituent self-identified Republicans, for example, support basically what the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is calling for as far as offering Medicare to everyone and letting that compete with private insurance, yet not a single Republican member of Congress has voiced support for that.

  2. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    I don’t think that matters. Because the parties have shifted their ideological positions doesn’t mean anything. Imagine the Democrats now were in favor of seizing capital, mandating education and employment for people, etc etc, would you say that FDR wasn’t a liberal because he would be to the right of contemporary Democrats, or that his SCOTUS Justices weren’t liberal?

  3. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    What are the “actual” watermarks for conservative and liberal today?

  4. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    But being relatively more or less conservative to contemporary politicians doesn’t make him actually more or less conservative.

  5. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    “Nixon first appointed Stevens to the Seventh Circuit, where his record was that of a moderate conservative. Was Nixon a liberal too?”

    Compared to these guys, YEAH. To quote John Dean, “Nixon would be considered a Green today.”

  6. Sarawaraclara Avatar
    Sarawaraclara

    Nixon first appointed Stevens to the Seventh Circuit, where his record was that of a moderate conservative. Was Nixon a liberal too?

    The point is, Stevens was a moderate conservative when appointed and grew more liberal over time. It is not unusual for justices to grow more markedly more liberal after they are appointed, as Justices Brennan, Blackmun, Stevens and Souter demonstrate. What is unusual, at least in the modern era, is for a justice to grow markedly more conservative over the years after joining the Court.

  7. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    As for this:

    “Uh, Stevens was originally a conservative. He was appointed by a Republican.”

    He was appointed by Gerald Ford, who would be considered so liberal by today’s Republican Party that they’d probably force him out of the Party.

  8. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    So you have some secret evidence that she’s a liberal then? O_o

  9. Sarawaraclara Avatar
    Sarawaraclara

    Uh, Stevens was originally a conservative. He was appointed by a Republican. Many members of the Court have grown more liberal over time.

    The people who are calling Sotomayor a moderate are people who don’t really understand how the courts work. It is exceedingly hard to find federal appellate court judges who are extremely liberal, precisely because we have a conservative Supreme Court writing precedent that the appellate panels are bound to follow. Trial court judges have sole decisionmaking authority over their cases and only have to worry about being overturned on appeal, but appellate justices serve on 3 judge panels and have to build consensus for their decisions, which naturally brings them closer to the center.

  10. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    I read through the SCOTUSBlog link, and I’m still finding myself agreeing with Dionne that she’s moderate-ish.

    I’ll say it again, considering the Democrats haven’t had this kind of majority in a long time, they’re pulling punches by putting this one through. The Court has moved unbelievably to the right the past 35 years. Heck, Stevens was considering a moderate in 1980 (Yglesias has a commentary on a Cass Susstein article about that here: http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/05/the-courts-right-shift.php), and now he’s the prime liberal.

    While I have nothing against her as a judge (and the hysterical attacks against her by the right are great, because it only further makes them look like maniacs), she seems to be eminently qualified in general, the fact is that the court has shifted so far to the right that we really, while we have the opportunity to do so, should’ve brought someone in who would’ve balanced things a lot more.

    Actually, that’s a good commentary on most of Obama’s appointments to anything. I think I like that.

  11. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    IRE,

    You’ve really got to figure out my style of self-mockery, oblique reference, and irony.

  12. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    I would really put more weight behind what some esquires are saying here, not what the talking heads say, YMMV.

  13. Sarawaraclara Avatar
    Sarawaraclara

    Her decision had nothing to do with abortion. She ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring one claim, which is a procedural issue. On another claim the 2nd circuit had already ruled on the identical issue and she just upheld that decision finding no first amendment violation. On the last issue, she ruled that the government could permissibly favor or oppose abortion in other countries as a policy decision, without violating equal protection.

    It’s not really an abortion decision, it’s a first amendment and constitutional decision that just happened to tangentially involve abortion.

    SCOTUSBlog did a great writeup on her decisions back when the vacancy first came open, and you can see a lot more here about the decisions she’s written.

    http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/judge-sotomayors-appellate-opinions-in-civil-cases/

  14. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    “But please, do continue to tell me how the person that the Republican Party spent 16 months blocking in an effort to prevent this very outcome is in fact a conservative.”

    I don’t think she’s a conservative, I think she’s center-ish. Did I say she’s conservative? I said she made a decision the right likes on abortion. Duh.

    Gotta go with my talking heads on this one:

    “The Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne says that today “liberals would be foolish to embrace Sotomayor as one of their own because her record is clearly that of a moderate.” The New York Times’ Charlie Savage suggests that pro-choice groups are worried about how reliable a vote she will be. And Daphne Eviatar thoroughly examines Sotomayor’s judicial record and concludes that liberals “may end up being disappointed with the president‚Äôs choice” because “it‚Äôs starting to sound like Obama nominated a highly capable technocrat.””

    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

    —

    Enough with the “The Republicans oppose (x) person and that’s good enough!” talking point, dude. They’d oppose Chuck Norris if Obama nominated him for chief ass kicker at this point.

  15. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    Odin:

    I’d be careful with the “nerd” label if I was you.

    Just saying.

  16. odinseye2k Avatar
    odinseye2k

    Law nerd.

  17. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    Perhaps rather than relaying others’ opinions and calling it fact, one should read 516 pages of her decisions and then come to one’s own conclusion.

    http://documents.nytimes.com/selected-cases-of-judge-sonia-sotomayor#p=1

  18. Drew Avatar
    Drew

    Okay, decisions:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28abortion.html?hp

    Although given that the abortion question was tangential to all of these, I still see the “right-leaning” assertion to be unfounded.

  19. Drew Avatar
    Drew

    “She’s known as making right-leaning decisions on abortion (which I’m actually in favor of)”

    You really have no idea what you’re talking about, do you?

    I say this because she has not rendered “decisions” on abortion but rather a “decision”, and even then, abortion was tangential to the case, which turned on the freedom of speech.

    But please, do continue to tell me how the person that the Republican Party spent 16 months blocking in an effort to prevent this very outcome is in fact a conservative.

  20. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124338260937756559.html#mod=rss_whats_news_us

    “Her record in more than 4,000 cases, including those from 11 years on the Second Circuit, shows her occasional siding with corporate defendants or diverting from a standard liberal position…

    …”There is no reason for the business community to be concerned” about Judge Sotomayor, said Lauren Rosenblum Goldman, a partner at Mayer Brown LLP who has represented businesses including Wachovia Corp. and Dow Chemical Co.”

    Aw yes she got the big corp. folks’ endorsement too. Rock on!

  21. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    You use that one too much IRE

    I like this one

    http://mobocracy.net/media/Yoda-Flame-war-begun.jpg

    “Zaid, I know you were a mere infant when it happened”

    Appeal to age? I obviously garnered all my political knowledge at the age of 6 and have learned nothing since then, I also can’t learn about things that happened in the past at all. History classes? Skipped that shit.

    “That she was appointed by Bush I means nothing in terms of whether she is liberal enough. I promise you, this was not “pulling punches” to nominate her. Pulling punches would have been someone moderate. She is not known as a moderate by any means.”

    She’s known as making right-leaning decisions on abortion (which I’m actually in favor of) and not making any decisions on gay rights. I don’t know her civil liberties positions. Are you arguing she’s a lefty? Because that’s unsubstantiated.

  22. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    I swear to god we need IMG embed allowed.

    http://pics.livejournal.com/twoflower/pic/0002e4dt/s640x480

  23. Sarawaraclara Avatar
    Sarawaraclara

    Zaid, I know you were a mere infant when it happened and don’t remember a time before judicial nominations were always a huge fight, but back when Sotomayor was nominated to the S.D.N.Y., Democrats controlled Congress so in order to full vacancies President Bush often let Senators recommend someone to fill the vacancies in their states. That used to be the way this sort of thing worked for all but the very few court vacancies. Daniel Patrick Moynihan suggested Sotomayor to Bush, who then nominated her. She received little opposition because she was just up for a federal district court slot, the Democrats liked her, and the Republicans were in the minority so there wasn’t much reason for them to waste firepower opposing her for the trial court level. She was more hotly contested when Clinton elevated her to the 2nd Circuit in 1998.

    That she was appointed by Bush I means nothing in terms of whether she is liberal enough. I promise you, this was not “pulling punches” to nominate her. Pulling punches would have been someone moderate. She is not known as a moderate by any means.

  24. Drew Avatar
    Drew

    Zaid, the Republican Party blocked her confirmation to her current position for 16 months, precisely because they feared she might someday be nominated to the Supreme Court.

    I wouldn’t say she “slid through” anything.

  25. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    I just warmed up a bit on her thanks to John Yoo

    http://ugaliberal.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-loses-war-criminal-vote.html

  26. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    She’s an OK pick, but I believe in tough love for the President. He’s pulling punches left and right, and he might not get another chance to have a filibuster-proof Senate and large majority in the House.

  27. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    And she slid through with little Republican opposition for a reason.

  28. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    The Bush appointee thing is a bit of a canard as it was Democrats’ choice for the appointment.

  29. Zaid Avatar
    Zaid

    A Bush sr. appointee.

    LOL @ Obama pulling his punches on just about everything.

  30. David Avatar
    David

    This will be the lead topic on Game On: blogtalkradio.com/gameon

    Stefan T. will be guest host tonight at 8:00

  31. Sarawaraclara Avatar
    Sarawaraclara

    I agree with Paula. I’m not opposed to her nomination, but I think there were better choices. Hopefully the next pick Obama gets will go to a true liberal lion of the sort that can weave beautiful constitutional law and go toe to toe with Scalia et al for decades to come.

  32. PaulaG Avatar
    PaulaG

    Mel – I think it’s a savvy choice. Not only was she appointed to the Appeals Court by a Republican, but the whole HIspanic woman thing gives her an automatic constituency, and the warm fuzzies of being a “first”. But she’s no liberal lion a la John Paul Stevens, and If I had my druthers, I would have gone with a someone more lefty for sure.

  33. Jen B. Avatar
    Jen B.

    FYI. She received 25 Republican votes in ’98, 8 of whom are still in the Senate:

    Bennett (R-UT)

    Cochran (R-MS)

    Collins (R-ME)

    Gregg (R-NH)

    Hatch (R-UT)

    Lugar (R-IN)

    Snowe (R-ME)

    Specter (R-PA)

  34. innerredneckexposed Avatar
    innerredneckexposed

    Should I care? Does this change the makeup of the court etc?

  35. MelGX Avatar
    MelGX

    You called it! And I assume you approve?

    I was wondering when this would come down.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *