Sonia Sotomayer

[she_who_is_not]

She is a pro-choice "Catholic." NPR is reporting.
More to come later.

[she_who_is_not]

Sotomayor!!!
Sorry about the misspell

[Brother Adam]

One of the most liberal on his short list of picks, but not surprising at all.

[kujo]

How can you substantiate your claim that she is "one of the most liberal" on his list? I can't find much on her.

[Brother Adam]

I can't other than a conversation I had with a friend who works on capitol hill earlier this morning that knows her stuff. I will try to list some of the things that she told me later when I get back from the road. If you read news reports you will notice most of them say things like [url="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/obama-announce-supreme-court-nominee-tuesday-morning/"]"But Sotomayor is considered one of the most liberal of Obama's potential nominees, and could set off a fight from the right during confirmation -- even though Republicans are far outnumbered on Capitol Hill.[/url]" which confirmed for me what my friend said about the appointment.

[thessalonian]

Maybe the 5 pro-life Catholics will influence her?

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='thessalonian' post='1875551' date='May 26 2009, 09:43 AM']Maybe the 5 pro-life Catholics will influence her?[/quote]
Maybe the Holy Spirit will convict her.

Prayers for our courts....

[Archaeology cat]

[littleflower+JMJ]

ditto on the praying!

[BG45]

[url="http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/26/scotus-pick-sonia-sotomayor/"]Personally, on a non-Life front, her comments and judicial rulings worry me.[/url]

She's made comments on how minority judges should allow their color to influence their rulings, that a wise latina woman should know more than an old white man who hasn't lived her life, and she sided with a racist city standard in Riccia v. DeStephano where white firefighters weren't promoted after passing the test because none of the department's minorities passed the test. That lattermost example should go before SCOTUS (the very group she's been nominated to) next month.

We don't need a reverse Rheinquist. He got his start in politics by harassing minority voters. Racism is racism, it doesn't matter which group is the target of it.

Edited May 26, 2009 by BG45

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='BG45' post='1875601' date='May 26 2009, 04:54 PM'][url="http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/26/scotus-pick-sonia-sotomayor/"]Personally, on a non-Life front, her comments and judicial rulings worry me.[/url]

She's made comments on how minority judges should allow their color to influence their rulings, that a wise latina woman should know more than an old white man who hasn't lived her life, and she sided with a racist city standard in Riccia v. DeStephano where white firefighters weren't promoted after passing the test because none of the department's minorities passed the test. That lattermost example should go before SCOTUS (the very group she's been nominated to) next month.

We don't need a reverse Rheinquist. He got his start in politics by harassing minority voters. Racism is racism, it doesn't matter which group is the target of it.[/quote]
Agreed. I saw some of those things as well - not what I want in a judge of any kind, let alone a Supreme Court justice.

[CatherineM]

Racist comments may turn some of the pro-choice senators.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1875626' date='May 26 2009, 12:20 PM']Racist comments may turn some of the pro-choice senators.[/quote]
Let's hope. I mean, pro-choice I expect. Racist, not so much.

[BG45]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' post='1875623' date='May 26 2009, 01:18 PM']Agreed. I saw some of those things as well - not what I want in a judge of any kind, let alone a Supreme Court justice.[/quote]

Yeah, I like my justices, especially at that level, to be...more objective.

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1875626' date='May 26 2009, 01:20 PM']Racist comments may turn some of the pro-choice senators.[/quote]

Possibly, it wouldn't surprise me. Especially those with dominantly white constituents, attack ads during re-election of those Senators could kill their careers.

[BG45]

Oh and the most important question for a nominee in this Presidency so far...has she paid her taxes? I'm hoping so, it would be an embarassing 3rd or 4th one if not.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='BG45' post='1875637' date='May 26 2009, 12:32 PM']Oh and the most important question for a nominee in this Presidency so far...has she paid her taxes? I'm hoping so, it would be an embarassing 3rd or 4th one if not.[/quote]
Yeah... that and has she paid for her nanny's social security. Nanny-gate seems to be an issue with nominees.

[kujo]

[quote name='Brother Adam' post='1875550' date='May 26 2009, 10:42 AM']I can't other than a conversation I had with a friend who works on capitol hill earlier this morning that knows her stuff. I will try to list some of the things that she told me later when I get back from the road. If you read news reports you will notice most of them say things like [url="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/26/obama-announce-supreme-court-nominee-tuesday-morning/"]"But Sotomayor is considered one of the most liberal of Obama's potential nominees, and could set off a fight from the right during confirmation -- even though Republicans are far outnumbered on Capitol Hill.[/url]" which confirmed for me what my friend said about the appointment.[/quote]

STOP THE PRESSES!!!!

FoxNews is accusing someone of being "the most liberal of Obama's potential nominees?!"

Honestly, do you think they wouldn't be saying that EXACT thing about whoever the nominee was?

[quote name='BG45' post='1875601' date='May 26 2009, 12:54 PM'][url="http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/26/scotus-pick-sonia-sotomayor/"]Personally, on a non-Life front, her comments and judicial rulings worry me.[/url]

She's made comments on how minority judges should allow their color to influence their rulings, that a wise latina woman should know more than an old white man who hasn't lived her life, and she sided with a racist city standard in Riccia v. DeStephano where white firefighters weren't promoted after passing the test because none of the department's minorities passed the test. That lattermost example should go before SCOTUS (the very group she's been nominated to) next month.

We don't need a reverse Rheinquist. He got his start in politics by harassing minority voters. Racism is racism, it doesn't matter which group is the target of it.[/quote]

Yeah. This pisses me off. For real.

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1875626' date='May 26 2009, 01:20 PM']Racist comments may turn some of the pro-choice senators.[/quote]

Don't hold your breath.

[BG45]

And to play Devil's Advocate, in Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush she upheld the Mexico City Policy saying that foreign organizations funded by U.S. dollars could not be used in foreign abortions.

[BG45]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1875640' date='May 26 2009, 01:36 PM']Yeah... that and has she paid for her nanny's social security. Nanny-gate seems to be an issue with nominees.[/quote]

I forgot about the nanny-gates to be honest!

[TotusTuusMaria]

I woke up this morning and read that she had been nominated. First thing I did was googled to see if I could figure out her stance and how radical she actually is. You just can't find anything on her.

She ruled against a "pro-choice" group:
[url="http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2009/05/sotomayor----her-record-on-abo.html"]http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/20...ord-on-abo.html[/url]

That is the only move she had made concerning abortion. Obama wouldn't elect a judge who was in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, but I would rather someone who appears less radical get it then him nominate someone else who might even be worse.