American jurisprudence is not going to fall off a cliff when Sotomayor becomes a Supreme Court Justice. Those who dislike her claim, among other things, that she is a racist in some way. Somehow, I seriously doubt that she could have been appointed as a Federal Appeals Court Judge if she was a racist or a “brown supremacist”. Surely, she could not have risen to this point in her career if she was.
Another reason Republicans don’t care for her is a speech she gave eight years ago in 2001. In this speech, she stated: “ethnicity and sex of a judge may and will make a difference in our judging”. Well, sure it will! Women go through different life experiences than men do. They approach situations in life different, even things such as dating for instance or expectations of marriage if they are so inclined. Men do the same thing.
Lifestyles manifest themselves into a persons ultimate being. A child born into a wealthy family will have a different view of life than one born into poverty. A child that grows up with a single parent will develop a different perspective of life than one raised with both parents. Each child’s ethnicity, Asian, Black, Latin or White, will also develop different mores, values or sense of being in the world. I guarantee you, that Justice Clarence Thomas has a different perspective of justice, what is right and what is wrong, than Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Justice Anthony Kennedy. For instance, on a recent case before the Supreme Court involving an inappropriate strip search of a pre-teen girl by school authorities in Texas, eight of the Justices ruled that it was wrong. The one who voted for the school district was Clarence Thomas. Evidently, there was a completely different set of moral standards going on here. Somehow, I bet the vote by the Supreme Court on this case would have been 9-0 if Sonia Sotomayor would have been on the court.
Judge Sotomayor has also quoted professors of law who said that, “to judge is an exercize of power (which it is…just watch Judge Judy) and that there is no objective stance but only a series of perspectives”, which it is. When a case is brought before a jury, prosecutors and defense lawyers attempt to prove their cases by trying to alter the perspectives of the case in the minds of the jurors. When lawyers bring a case before the Supreme Court, that is what they are attempting to do…alter the perspectives of the Justices by justifying the reasoning of their position.
Another complaint that Republican neocons have, it that she can’t write “proper” opinions concerning her decisions. I, personally, don’t view this complaint as really being a legitimate one. Evidently, she has done well enough over the years to achieve where she is at. I’d be willing to bet that there is a huge percentage of Americans, including myself, that lack superb English skills. However, in reviewing the qualifications to become a Supreme Court Justice, I didn’t see that requirement. Maybe I missed it.
Bottom line is, I’d rather have a Justice ruling against a school district that wants to strip search a little girl than one who thinks otherwise, whether she can write a “proper” opinion or not. Clarence Thomas has been on the court since 1991 and has yet to write a single opinion.
Also, there are more females in this country than males. It is just the way nature works. Latins are the second largest minority group in the country and increasing every day. There has been two white women on the court and two black males. It is time for a Latin to sit on the court. If not now, when? There is no such thing as a “perfect” Supreme Court Justice in an imperfect society.
