Sonia Sotomayer

[tofu]

As long as it "lives and breathes" in a direction you prefer correct? Remember, activist judges can be conservative too. Wouldn't it be better to leave changing its meaning to the people, rather than to a judge's political whims?

Sorry, there's no such thing as an activist judge.

When judges in supreme courts (state/federal) make a decision that affects law, they're doing their job.

The Supreme Court is meant to be a check and balance to the legislative branch. If something is unfair, it's your right to be able to appeal it to the Supreme Court.

And no, it wouldn't be better to leave it to the people. Remember that the will of the people, at one (frighteningly recent) point in time, was that schools should be segregated. Aren't you glad we didn't go by the will of the people in Brown v. Board of Education?

 

[tofu]

Sotomayor said that a wise Latino woman would make better decisions than a white male. Gibbs said that she misspoke regarding the word "better." Yet I saw on CNN four speaches in which she said the same thing. Comments?

You left out one of the operative words of the 2008 election: HOPE.

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.​

All she said was that she hopes her experiences will help her reach better conclusions in cases where that kind of experience matters.

IOW, she hopes she can come to a better conclusion because of her experiences.

I don't see anything wrong with that. In fact, I agree. I hope her experiences will help her come to a better conclusion too.

Nowhere did she say she would come to a better conclusion, or that she is smarter because she is Latina. It's all about reading her sentence in context.

It is my opinion that her comment has been taken out of context in a right-wing smear job against her. Even if the comment was poorly worded, it's obvious what her intent in saying it was.

I think it is very telling that this has summed up most of the publicized Republican opposition to her. She is qualified for the job, and this is the worst they can find.

 

[Smiling JOe]

My only question is, How can a person who is born in the Bronx, be Puerto Rican? I thought anyone born in the USA was American. I think someone needs a dictionary for her birthday.

 

[Mango]

My only question is, How can a person who is born in the Bronx, be Puerto Rican? I thought anyone born in the USA was American. I think someone needs a dictionary for her birthday.

You obviously have never been to the Bronx, my friend.

 

[Lynnie]

You left out one of the operative words of the 2008 election: HOPE.

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.
​

All she said was that she hopes her experiences will help her reach better conclusions in cases where that kind of experience matters.

IOW, she hopes she can come to a better conclusion because of her experiences.

I don't see anything wrong with that. In fact, I agree. I hope her experiences will help her come to a better conclusion too.

Nowhere did she say she would come to a better conclusion, or that she is smarter because she is Latina. It's all about reading her sentence in context.

It is my opinion that her comment has been taken out of context in a right-wing smear job against her. Even if the comment was poorly worded, it's obvious what her intent in saying it was.

I think it is very telling that this has summed up most of the publicized Republican opposition to her. She is qualified for the job, and this is the worst they can find.

I hope they all are unbiased and reach the best decision when interpreting the law, regardless of their national descent. I believe even white men have had rich experiences....as well as black men and women, Asian, Middle Eastern, etc.

She is a good judge and she should qualify herself based upon this and this merit only. Congress should approve her based upon her merit, not her ethnicity nor her decsent......this is America and we all have roots elsewhere.

Even in her hearings she is touting to be better because of her Puerto Rican heritage!

 

[scooterbug44]

My only question is, How can a person who is born in the Bronx, be Puerto Rican? I thought anyone born in the USA was American. I think someone needs a dictionary for her birthday.

Same way a US born Scooterbug can be German and Scottish - your racial heritage and your citizenship are 2 different things.

 

[tofu]

I hope they all are unbiased and reach the best decision when interpreting the law, regardless of their national descent. I believe even white men have had rich experiences....as well as black men and women, Asian, Middle Eastern, etc.

They have... but probably not experiences dealing with discrimination or Hispanic culture.

I think what she's saying is that it will be nice to have some diversity on the SC. I agree. They're supposed to represent us, after all.

She is a good judge and she should qualify herself based upon this and this merit only. Congress should approve her based upon her merit, not her ethnicity nor her decsent......this is America and we all have roots elsewhere.

Even in her hearings she is touting to be better because of her Puerto Rican heritage!

I haven't heard her claim to be better because of her descent. Do you have a quote where she said that or implied it?

 

[Lynnie]

They have... but probably not experiences dealing with discrimination or Hispanic culture.

I think what she's saying is that it will be nice to have some diversity on the SC. I agree. They're supposed to represent us, after all.


I haven't heard her claim to be better because of her descent. Do you have a quote where she said that or implied it?

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.

Isn't this her quote? The current justices have certainly dealt with life experiences and one can deduce that they have dealt with discrimination. She has lived a white man life; therefore, based upon her statement in many/some situations a white man can hope to reach a better conclusion based upon his rich life experiences that she hasn't lived.

I think she is qualifed. Her statement, however is over the top. Personally, I would prefer to have justices who come out of the gate unbiased despite his/her rich life experiences.

Diversity is always desirable.

 

[Alicia Leonard]

No one is unbiased due to their life experiences. Not you, me or anyone else. Our attitudes are based on on our perceptions and those are based on our environment. We can strive to not be that way, but to think that any judge that enters the bench doesn't have a bias is to belive they are not human. They must strive to uphold the law, no matter the consequence or their personal beliefs. To see Sessions accuse her of racism is like; Pot meet kettle. Ugg.

 

[Lynnie]

No one is unbiased due to their life experiences. Not you, me or anyone else. Our attitudes are based on on our perceptions and those are based on our environment. We can strive to not be that way, but to think that any judge that enters the bench doesn't have a bias is to belive they are not human. They must strive to uphold the law, no matter the consequence or their personal beliefs. To see Sessions accuse her of racism is like; Pot meet kettle. Ugg.

Oooooh, has there been an accusation of racism? I can see both sides on this; however, I just think the statement is a bit much.

I think she is qualifed on her merit, not her heritage. When you replace others (race or qualifers) in her statement, it isn't appropriate for anyone to state/claim, etc. Just my opinion.....but, the opinions stated here on the board are more correct.