Obama nominates Sotomayor to Supreme Court

Status
Not open for further replies.

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,232
Reaction score
19
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Obama on Tuesday nominated federal Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.


Judge Sonia Sotomayor on Tuesday calls her nomination to the high court "the most humbling honor of my life."

1 of 2 Sotomayor, 54, would be the first Hispanic and third female U.S. Supreme Court justice if confirmed.

Obama announced the nomination Tuesday morning in the East Room of the White House.

"Thank you, Mr. President, for the most humbling honor of my life," Sotomayor said.

"My heart is bursting with gratitude," she said. She gave special recognition to her mother, who was sitting in the audience.

"I am an ordinary person who has been blessed with extraordinary opportunities and experiences," Sotomayor said.

Obama called Sotomayor "an inspiring woman who I believe will make a great justice."

She "has worked at almost every level of our judicial system, providing her with a depth of experience and a breath of perspective that will be invaluable as a Supreme Court justice," he added. Watch as Obama cites Sotomayor's three decades of experience »

Obama said Sotomayor "would bring more experience on the bench and more varied experience on the bench than anyone currently serving on the United States Supreme Court had when they were appointed." Read Sotomayor's bio and record »

The president met with Sotomayor at the White House for an hour Thursday, according to senior administration officials. He was impressed with Sotomayor's personal story and professional qualifications after meeting her, but he did not immediately offer her the job, two senior administration sources added.

Obama made his final decision Monday, the sources said. Watch CNN's Jim Acosta break the news of Sotomayor's nomination »

Sotomayor, a judge on the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, was named a U.S. District Court judge by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, and was elevated to her current seat by President Clinton.

Sotomayor, who is of Puerto Rican descent, rose from humble beginnings at a housing project in the South Bronx and went on to attend Princeton University and Yale Law School.

She has minimal personal assets compared with many of her judicial colleagues; a 2007 financial disclosure form showed her with a checking and savings account valued at between $50,000 and $115,000.

Supporters say her appointment history, along with what they call her moderate-liberal views, would give her some bipartisan backing in the Senate.

A senior White House official said that Sotomayor was "nominated by George Bush -- then Bill Clinton -- [and has] more judicial experience than anyone sitting on the court had at the time they were nominated."

Another senior administration official said that Obama "was looking for someone with a balance of skills: very, very smart; independent thinker; highly regarded for integrity and commitment to the law."

"He found all of those things with her, including his goal of selecting someone with the empathy factor -- real world, practical experience and understanding of how the law affects real people."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, issued a statement calling Sotomayor's record "exemplary."

"Judge Sotomayor has a long and distinguished career on the federal bench," Leahy said. "I believe [she] understands that the courthouse doors must be as open to ordinary Americans as they are to government and big corporations."

Sotomayor, however, has suffered through recent stinging criticism in the media and blogs from both the left and right over perceived -- some defenders say invented -- concerns about her temperament and intellect.

As she has risen through the judicial ranks, Sotomayor increasingly has drawn the ire and opposition of conservatives. A majority of Republican senators opposed her elevation to the appellate court in 1998.

However, an official with the Republican National Committee promised that the GOP will be equitable toward Sotomayor.

"The Republicans are going to strike a tone that's fair, that allows the vetting process to happen like it should, and that's in stark contrast to how the Democrats dealt with Judge Roberts when you look back a couple years ago," the official said, referring to the 2005 confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts.

In a statement, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said that Senate Republicans "will thoroughly examine [Sotomayor's] record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law even-handedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences."

McConnell said he trusts that the Democratic majority "will ensure there is adequate time to prepare for this nomination, and a full and fair opportunity to question the nominee and debate her qualifications."

Conservatives point to, among other things, her authoring of a 2008 opinion supporting the city of New Haven, Connecticut's decision to throw out the results of a firefighter promotion exam because almost no minorities qualified for promotions.

The Supreme Court heard an appeal of the case in April; a final opinion is pending.

"Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written," said Wendy Long, counsel to the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network.

"She thinks that judges should dictate policy and that one's sex, race and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench. ... She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court."

However, the senior White House official said Sotomayor has had "99 percent of her decisions" upheld by a higher court. Watch how conservatives are gearing up for a fight »

Some Hispanic groups expressed concern after a skit last week on "Late Show With David Letterman" compared Sotomayor with a noisy Spanish-speaking judge on a popular TV courtroom show that settles petty legal disputes.

Obama said Saturday he wants intellectual firepower and a common touch in the next Supreme Court justice and said he doesn't "feel weighed down by having to choose ... based on demographics."

Obama's nominee will replace retiring Justice David Souter, who announced this month he would step down when the court's current session ends this summer.

There had been wide speculation that Obama would name a woman to the court, which has one female justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Obama also had been under pressure to nominate a Hispanic justice to the court.

Obama's nomination will have to be confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the full Senate. Watch why Democrats want the process to go quickly »


The nominee is not expected to have difficulty being confirmed in the Democratic-controlled Senate in time for the new court session in October.

The president has said he hopes to have hearings in July, with the confirmation completed before Congress leaves for the summer.

Obama nominates Sotomayor to Supreme Court - CNN.com
 
She is the MOST qualified person in the history of SCOTUS! In fact, she has MORE expereince than any judge has on the supreme court.
 
Anyone still regret voting for Obama? :roll:

Anyway this sounds like great news. He has actually made a wise choice on her who is a REAL judge than any other judges lol.
 
She isn't bad but still question about her views on gun rights, it would be easier to approve by senators due majority democrat, also few republicans.
 
Anyone still regret voting for Obama? :roll:

Anyway this sounds like great news. He has actually made a wise choice on her who is a REAL judge than any other judges lol.

Oh man, you need leave anyone who oppose to Obama alone and it's not worth for you to argue with anyone who is oppose to Obama, remember about US is multi-parties democracy and you have deal with someone who disagree with Obama or other government.
 
yeah a vote for her is a vote for la raza amazing how he hasnt picked a conservative white guy for anything, yep theres diversity all right (im being sarcastic)
 
Hmm...people appear to be ignoring the fact that she was nominated to the Federal Court of Appeals, the second highest court in the land, by George Bush, Sr. :cool2:
 
Hmm...people appear to be ignoring the fact that she was nominated to the Federal Court of Appeals, the second highest court in the land, by George Bush, Sr. :cool2:

It isn't that surprising. Just because they share a name, they are not the same man.

Bush was a lot less right wing than his son.
 
It isn't that surprising. Just because they share a name, they are not the same man.

Bush was a lot less right wing than his son.

Still right wing. Her nomination to the second highest court in the land came from a conservative white male member of the Republican Party. My point is, her qualifications are the issue, not who nominated her. Her confirmation would also place the Supreme Court in a position of being 2/3 Catholic.

Just asking that people review her qualifications and her judicial history before they make an emotionally based objection simply because she is a Hispanic woman nominated by a black president.
 
Still right wing. Her nomination to the second highest court in the land came from a conservative white male member of the Republican Party. My point is, her qualifications are the issue, not who nominated her. Her confirmation would also place the Supreme Court in a position of being 2/3 Catholic.

Just asking that people review her qualifications and her judicial history before they make an emotionally based objection simply because she is a Hispanic woman nominated by a black president.

I guess I have to stand in for Jiro? (and not do a very good job of it either)

If it is 2/3 Catholic, aren't you going to be upset about that as it will be bad for the pro-choice people?
 
I guess I have to stand in for Jiro? (and not do a very good job of it either)

If it is 2/3 Catholic, aren't you going to be upset about that as it will be bad for the pro-choice people?

:laugh2:

No. The justices decide the constitutionality of law, not morality. The Catholics that are already appointed have upheld the law at every challenge. That particular law has already been determined, time and again, to be constitutionally sound.
 
Just asking that people review her qualifications and her judicial history before they make an emotionally based objection simply because she is a Hispanic woman nominated by a black president.

:werd:
 
Just asking that people review her qualifications and her judicial history before they make an emotionally based objection simply because she is a Hispanic woman nominated by a black president.

First, let's remember.. if Sotomayor is elected, it would make her the MOST EXPERIENCED JUDGE EVER ON SCOTUS. That is WHY it is SO hard to start filibustering her. She has MORE EXPEREINCE than any of justices on SCOTUS.

Second, remember Thomas Clarance? He's not that experienced yet he was nominated by Bush. And he's black too. Don't you think there is actually an element of racial consideration involved when nominating a justice? I am certain there is since there were more qualified nominees at that time.

Third, race still matters no matter how hard we try to be "color-blind."
 
First, let's remember.. if Sotomayor is elected, it would make her the MOST EXPERIENCED JUDGE EVER ON SCOTUS. That is WHY it is SO hard to start filibustering her. She has MORE EXPEREINCE than any of justices on SCOTUS.

Second, remember Thomas Clarance? He's not that experienced yet he was nominated by Bush. And he's black too. Don't you think there is actually an element of racial consideration involved when nominating a justice? I am certain there is since there were more qualified nominees at that time.

Third, race still matters no matter how hard we try to be "color-blind."

Oh, yeah....the same Clarence Thomas who played the race card during the investigation of his affair with Anita Hill?:hmm:
 
Let's see how hypocritical GOP is.

First, about her comment on "court of appeals making policy" - she said, ""All of the legal defense funds out there, they are looking for people with court of appeals experience because the court of appeals is where policy is made," she said, laughing a bit through the next part: "And I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know. Okay, I know. I'm not promoting it. I'm not advocating it. I know."

That outraged conservatives but the problem is that they are outraged for nothing. She was RIGHT. She spoke the truth and she did NOT like her truth!

Even Justice Judge Scalia said the same thing, "Not only do state-court judges possess the power to "make" common law, but they have the immense power to shape the States' constitutions as well."

and

"In fact, however, the judges of inferior courts often "make law," since the precedent of the highest court does not cover every situation, and not every case is reviewed. "

Where's the outrage on those comments?!?! The difference is that Sotomayor does NOT advocate and does not like it but acknowledged that its' where policy is made.

Now, as for her being a Latino woman being more experienced and taking that into account, funny... Alito said pretty the same thing!

"Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point. ... And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position. [...]

And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."

Oh where's that outrage?!?!

It only shows how GOP is totally hypocritical and being selective.

Empathy? Hear what Bush said when he nominated Thomas:

"I have followed this man's career for some time, and he has excelled in everything that he has attempted. He is a delightful and warm, intelligent person who has great empathy and a wonderful sense of humor."

Did I hear anyone complain about it? Apparently not!

Scalia, Alito Quotes Blunt Conservative Attacks On Sotomayor
 
Let's see how hypocritical GOP is.

First, about her comment on "court of appeals making policy" - she said, ""All of the legal defense funds out there, they are looking for people with court of appeals experience because the court of appeals is where policy is made," she said, laughing a bit through the next part: "And I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know. Okay, I know. I'm not promoting it. I'm not advocating it. I know."

That outraged conservatives but the problem is that they are outraged for nothing. She was RIGHT. She spoke the truth and she did NOT like her truth!

Even Justice Judge Scalia said the same thing, "Not only do state-court judges possess the power to "make" common law, but they have the immense power to shape the States' constitutions as well."

and

"In fact, however, the judges of inferior courts often "make law," since the precedent of the highest court does not cover every situation, and not every case is reviewed. "

Where's the outrage on those comments?!?! The difference is that Sotomayor does NOT advocate and does not like it but acknowledged that its' where policy is made.

Now, as for her being a Latino woman being more experienced and taking that into account, funny... Alito said pretty the same thing!

"Senator, I tried to in my opening statement, I tried to provide a little picture of who I am as a human being and how my background and my experiences have shaped me and brought me to this point. ... And that's why I went into that in my opening statement. Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position. [...]

And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."

Oh where's that outrage?!?!

It only shows how GOP is totally hypocritical and being selective.

Empathy? Hear what Bush said when he nominated Thomas:

"I have followed this man's career for some time, and he has excelled in everything that he has attempted. He is a delightful and warm, intelligent person who has great empathy and a wonderful sense of humor."

Did I hear anyone complain about it? Apparently not!

Scalia, Alito Quotes Blunt Conservative Attacks On Sotomayor

im a white straight male I get discrimnated against all the time.....the only thing ill say on soto is she was picked because shes hispanice (discrimnation) just like the majority of obamas other picks
thats really all I got to say on that
 
im a white straight male I get discrimnated against all the time.....the only thing ill say on soto is she was picked because shes hispanice (discrimnation) just like the majority of obamas other picks
thats really all I got to say on that
Oh really? Let's see, last time I checked, the supreme court was all white except one. Seems fair to have ONE black man. America has 50%-50% male-female ratio. How many women on the court? Totally under-represented.

Latino population is growing rapidly and the court needs to have a QUALIFIED hispanic person. But the fact that it's also female makes it better and make the court more diverse.

I definitely do NOT want all white male court as it does NOT accurately reflect the actual diversity of America.
 
Oh really? Let's see, last time I checked, the supreme court was all white except one. Seems fair to have ONE black man. America has 50%-50% male-female ratio. How many women on the court? Totally under-represented.

Latino population is growing rapidly and the court needs to have a QUALIFIED hispanic person. But the fact that it's also female makes it better and make the court more diverse.

I definitely do NOT want all white male court as it does NOT accurately reflect the actual diversity of America.

Race color isn't matters and you are trying to draw the race card.
 
Race color isn't matters and you are trying to draw the race card.

I am not playing a race card because race does matter. Gender does matter. To say that they don't is lying.

Suppose if Obama appoints ALL qualified nominees who are also BLACK to SCOTUS, how would you feel? I'd be furious. Obama knows and he did NOT intend to make it all black as he thinks it would be WRONG!

How about if we make the entire court all female. How would you feel?

Gender and race does matter, foxrac.
 
I am not playing a race card because race does matter. Gender does matter. To say that they don't is lying.

Suppose if Obama appoints ALL qualified nominees who are also BLACK to SCOTUS, how would you feel? I'd be furious. Obama knows and he did NOT intend to make it all black as he thinks it would be WRONG!

How about if we make the entire court all female. How would you feel?

Gender and race does matter, foxrac.

Both of them don't matters when appoint the judge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top