CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
May 30, 2009 – 9:15 a.m.
Obama Gets It Right With Sotomayor Selection
By Richard L. Connor, CQ Guest Columnist
Gender matters. Race matters. So does empathy.
Personally, I’d feel more comfortable standing before a judge considered to be empathetic.
The nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to succeed Justice David H. Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court says good things about how Americans think and who we consider to be acceptable in high office.
Where I live, we recently had a primary election to choose candidates for two vacancies on our county court.
There were 17 people on the ballot. One candidate spent almost $300,000 but lost. One of the primary election winners, though, spent a fraction of that — $40,000 — and made the cut despite gender (she’s a woman) and background (she’s not from an influential family, which in small-town elections can be a decisive advantage.)
I was impressed that the voters of Luzerne County, Pa., responded to this unknown, Tina Polachek-Gartley. They liked her ideas. They liked her passion and record of fighting for victims’ rights.
She may not win in the general election but her primary victory is the kind of milestone — on a small scale — that President Obama pushed on a big scale with the Sotomayor selection.
The nation’s highest court should be representative of the people of this country.
Women over 18 years of age today in this country make up over 50 percent of the population. Although it was nine years ago, the census reported that just under 107 million women lived here versus just under 98 million men.
Statistics from as recently as 2005 list almost 15 percent of the country as being of Hispanic/Latino descent.
There are nine justices on the Supreme Court. Only one is a woman and none are of Hispanic/Latino descent.
Life experiences matter as well. Judge Sotomayor, born of Puerto Rican parents, grew up in New York City in an environment that was at best a struggle. She overcame odds to study at Princeton for her undergraduate degree and then go to law school at Yale.
Overcoming obstacles is a good background for a leader. It proves that this is a land of opportunity. It gives credence to the American Dream and our ideal of being a country where you can make it if you try hard enough.
And I like it that the ultimate arbiter of the law of the land isn’t just comprised of people who look like me.
Perhaps my favorite part of the debate over Sotomayor’s nomination is about the way she would fit in on the high court, and the criticism of Obama for making a safe choice by selecting a judge whose temperament appears to be much like the one she would replace.
That means Sotomayor, if confirmed, wouldn’t be expected to change the judicial complexion of the current court. There would still be four judges on the left and four on the right. In the middle will continue to be Justice Anthony M. Kennedy .
You could say Obama, with this choice, has made difference without making a “difference.” Fine. That’s exactly the right debate to have.
Call me a Pollyanna. Bash me as a conservative who lost his way. But I think Obama should take a bow on this one.
No, I haven’t bought the whole package. Obama’s math on the budget and the deficit still scares me. His leaning toward big government is troubling. The trend toward nationalization of businesses is anathema.
With the Sotomayor nomination, the president demonstrated he is a risk taker and innovator.
Good choice.
Richard L. Connor is the chief executive officer and ownership partner of the Wilkes-Barre, Pa., Publishing Co., which owns a group of daily and weekly newspapers. A newspaperman for 40 years, he previously was president and publisher of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram in Texas. He has written a column for most of his career, and has served on two Pulitzer Prize for Journalism nominating committees.
Comments
I guess I don't really understand why it's important to care about the race and/or gender of a Supreme Court justice. I want a Justice that will apply the law and interpret the Constitution in a rational and logical way. These cases aren't about empathy or putting a particular spin on cases - outcomes should be race and gender neutral. Kind of like when I had surgery - I really don't care whether my surgeon is black, white, latino, or asian. All I care about is a good outcome. I don't oppose Obama's choice because she's a woman or because she's a latino. I'm troubled by the prospect that her record of judicial activism will negatively impact the Court's rulings. JSGreen
I have read some of her case rulings. Her judicial record is sound. I am thrilled with this nomination and less thrilled with what the opposition has displayed about themselves. As far as I am concerned, there is no more low for them to go. They have, after 6 1/2 months of striving, reached rock bottom, and, if they had something constructive to add to the discussion on any issue, I would not hear it or notice it because I no longer trust anything they have to say. That is a shame, but, they did it to themselves and they have done this country a huge disservice with their lack of intelligence, integrity, professionalism, and committment to governance.
I read CQ's guest editorials frequently. I have frequently disagreed with Mr. Connor's point of view and have posted my rather sarcastic comments here on occasion. When I read this editorial and looked at who wrote it, I was amazed. I learned that what I preach works well for me too! I often say that if we tone down the left/right rhetoric and listen and discuss things with each other in measured tones, we can find common ground in many areas that will be the basis for positive change. Thank you, Mr. Connor for the article and reminding me to listen instead of categorizing based on previous perceptions. If you are castigated "Bash me as a conservative who lost his way" or called a "Pollyanna," come over to the liberal/progressive side of the table. We always need people that will, on occasion, tell us that our way is not the only way (even if we disagree, we should not be disagreeable). Thank you again!
Maybe the next judge should be a sherper. If "life experences" are the key to making a good judge, then the sherper would have it. Just because a persons grandfather came here and had a hard life, hardly gives me the comfort I would be looking for if I stood before them. What contrbution was this woman made to her people? What earth-moving judgement has she made that helped man-kind? Where has a "wise Latian" been seen in her actions taken? Bottom line -- "It's good to be the king."
There has to be a better Latina available than Sotomayor. Her views, using the words of Chucky-boy Schumer, are way out of the mainstream of legal thought. She wrote a paper, while at Princeton, that actually made the argument that the 2nd Amendment ONLY authorizes gun ownership for government organizations such as the military, police, etc. More than a few leftist legal scholars have this opinion. However, in this paper, she went way further of the deep end to state that the 2nd Amendment actually prohibits gun ownership by individuals and that individual gun ownership has been illegal since the Bill of Rights was adopted! Extraordinary! Did you here about this NRA? Check it out. http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/05/sotomayor_right.html
Who wouldn't want to stand before an empathatic judge -- assuming one wants to stand before a judge at all. The question is: what is empathy? Legal proceedings resolve conflicts. There are (at least) two sides to every question. We value mercy and compassion. Rightly so. We also value justice. Both sides of each question before a court likely feel they are seeking justice and hope for a judge who can penetrate the facts of the case to see the merit in deciding to their favor. If I owned property that I wanted to develop and the government expropriated it to develop the property itself, I'd like a judge to understand my pain and outrage. If I were a government wanting "smart growth" to proceed in a certain direction, I'd want a judge who understands the "common good" may need to trump individual desires. Where is the empathy? That's why we have law: to provide predictable rules of conduct. We are a nation of laws, not of men. If "empathy" is a code word for setting aside the law to favor one party or another, I'm not sure that kind of empathy serves a useful societal purpose.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: