PDA

View Full Version : Sotomayor is Obama's SCOTUS nominee, what does this mean for 2A?


aplinker
05-26-2009, 5:13 AM
So now that we know who the nominee is, what does this mean for us?

http://www.thehotjoints.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/sotomayer.jpg

SCOTUSblog blurb:
Second Amendment: Sotomayor was also a member of the panel that issued a per curiam opinion in another controversial case that may be headed for the Court next year. In Maloney v. Cuomo, 554 F.3d 56 (2009), the panel considered (as relevant here) a claim by a New York attorney that a state law prohibiting possession of a chuka stick (also known as nunchaku, a device used in martial arts consisting of two sticks joined by a rope or chain) violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. The district court rejected the claim on the ground that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. On appeal, the panel affirmed. Relying on the Supreme Court’s 1886 decision in Presser v. Illinois, it explained that it was “settled law . . . that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose” on the individual’s right to bear arms. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court continued, “does not invalidate this longstanding principle.” And while acknowledging the possibility that “Heller might be read to question the continuing validity of this principle,” the panel deemed itself bound to follow Presser because it “directly controls, leaving to the Supreme Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.” Maloney’s lawyers intend to file a petition for certiorari in late June.

Soldier415
05-26-2009, 5:39 AM
I have the strong feeling that anyone that Obama appoints will not be grounded in the law and the constitution...

The word "Activist" comes to mind...

deebix
05-26-2009, 5:42 AM
great, another person on the craplist

Fjold
05-26-2009, 5:44 AM
She's a liberal from New York who was appointed to the federal bench by Slick Willie. I think that we can pretty much know how she thinks on 2nd Amendment issues.

Maestro Pistolero
05-26-2009, 5:46 AM
This better go down in flames. She, along with Eric Holder, do not believe that the Second Amendment applies to the states. She's big trouble.

Timberline
05-26-2009, 5:54 AM
She's a liberal from New York who was appointed to the federal bench by Slick Willie. I think that we can pretty much know how she thinks on 2nd Amendment issues.

She was initially appointed by W's father in 1992. That's a long record on the bench, it will be easy to glean her judicial temperament.

BroncoBob
05-26-2009, 6:05 AM
Here is a interesting comment by her.

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, she said, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."

dg29
05-26-2009, 6:15 AM
Well if you take into account her record and statement where she believes that a judge should deliver ruling while considering their own gender and skin color. Now insert white male into her past statement and you would be considered a racist.Then consider that she , by all terms of the definition, is considered an activist and far left liberal (to the edge of the scale).
She will cause turmoil on the scotus and attemt to evade rulings based strictly under the guidelines and boundries on the Constitution. A fine prodigy of affirmative action and scholorships. Yeah, she'll be a real assest to our 2A rights!

Adonlude
05-26-2009, 6:19 AM
I expect to see less guns and more "migrant workers" in California.

foxtrotuniformlima
05-26-2009, 6:21 AM
As several appointees have shown, past performance is no indication of future actions.

Obama appointed someone that seems to be a moderate. I think he was more concerned with the ethnicity & sex of the nominee than anything else.

This should be a slam dunk confirmation.

glbtrottr
05-26-2009, 6:21 AM
Second Amendment: Sotomayor was also a member of the panel that issued a per curiam opinion in another controversial case that may be headed for the Court next year. In Maloney v. Cuomo, 554 F.3d 56 (2009), the panel considered (as relevant here) a claim by a New York attorney that a state law prohibiting possession of a chuka stick (also known as nunchaku, a device used in martial arts consisting of two sticks joined by a rope or chain) violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. The district court rejected the claim on the ground that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. On appeal, the panel affirmed. Relying on the Supreme Court’s 1886 decision in Presser v. Illinois, it explained that it was “settled law . . . that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose” on the individual’s right to bear arms. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court continued, “does not invalidate this longstanding principle.” And while acknowledging the possibility that “Heller might be read to question the continuing validity of this principle,” the panel deemed itself bound to follow Presser because it “directly controls, leaving to the Supreme Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.” Maloney’s lawyers intend to file a petition for certiorari in late June.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/judge-sotomayors-appellate-opinions-in-civil-cases/

On first Amendment issues and "DOUCHEBAGS":

http://paullevinson.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayors-anti-first-amendment.html

On White Women and Hispanics being better judges, and her racist views (Volokh)


http://volokh.com/posts/1242399411.shtml


Every step the man takes shows the fastest path to destroying virtually everything this country stood for, and "progressive" isn't quite the word that comes to mind.

p.s.: I am both of a Hispanic origin and parents, was raised in various Latin countries until 16, and the appointment of this woman is embarrassing in my opinion.

Fjold
05-26-2009, 6:27 AM
She was initially appointed by W's father in 1992. That's a long record on the bench, it will be easy to glean her judicial temperament.


Oops, my mistake.

"As a judge, she has a bipartisan pedigree. She was first appointed by a Republican, President George H.W. Bush, then named an appeals judge by President Bill Clinton in 1997."

CSDGuy
05-26-2009, 6:43 AM
A bio of her done by CNN highlights several cases that she's decided... and ALL of those highlighted were either ultimately reversed by SCOTUS or SCOTUS determined that the reasoning behind an upheld decision was flawed. Somehow, I think this is going to end up much like Bush 43's first couple SC Justice nominations... rejected and a trial balloon to see what Congress'll accept.

They're going to see her as highly controversial.

elenius
05-26-2009, 6:43 AM
So is the NRA going to "score" the confirmation votes? It would be quite pleasing to see one anti-gun candidate after another go down in flames until Obama is forced to appoint someone reasonable... But this is probably wishful thinking, and it may not be good strategy for the NRA to even attempt...

MolonLabe2008
05-26-2009, 7:11 AM
Yeah. She looks like she will "interpret" the law as it was written... :rolleyes:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OfC99LrrM2Q&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OfC99LrrM2Q&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

hawk1
05-26-2009, 7:11 AM
Will the repubs do anything to stop this?
If I had to say, I would bet they do nothing.

Erik S. Klein
05-26-2009, 7:20 AM
Will the repubs do anything to stop this?
If I had to say, I would bet they do nothing.

Unless they can grab a few democrats to help they can't do squat.

MolonLabe2008
05-26-2009, 7:22 AM
Why is it so important to nominate people because of their race and gender rather than their qualifications? :confused:

1BigPea
05-26-2009, 7:30 AM
Anyone this far left is not good for SCOTUS and our Country. NoBama made his pick based on race and gender and far left beliefs, pitiful.

MolonLabe2008
05-26-2009, 7:31 AM
“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.”
--- Judge Sonia Sotomayor

I thought Judges were supposed to "interpret" the law as it was written and NOT impose their "empathy" when making decisions that will affect all of Americans? :confused:

hawk1
05-26-2009, 7:32 AM
Why is it so important to nominate people because of their race and gender rather than their qualifications? :confused:

It's not done for that reason.
The race and gender part is out there to stop those from voting against a person before they even look at their qualifications.:thumbsup:

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 7:55 AM
Her vote(on 2A issue) would be more well thgought out than a white male so we should all get behind her :TFH:

AKman
05-26-2009, 8:04 AM
"I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging, But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage."

"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"

We may be allowed to keep our 2A rights, but will do so while toiling in the fields.

st.clouds
05-26-2009, 8:05 AM
The more I watch Obama's action the more I'm convinced that he is what his record says, despite his claims of looking for a common middle ground. What's so sad is that most people bought in to his sweet talks, instead of digging a little deeper at the truth - hoping some how, some way, big government would save them from themselves, their irresponsible ways, their mortgages, finances, even at the cost of their freedom. They couldn't be happier if the government had put them in a tube, preserved like pickles, stripped of any freedom, as long as it keeps them from killing themselves.

Oh and empathy my ***... of course most people go goo goo ga ga, teary eyed at the word "empathy", not knowing what the the justice system is all about. Hint: justice...

Based on a quick look at her record, it's pretty obvious that she's a racist, far left, judge activist. BTW racism is a two way street.

CNN Has a pretty understandable summary of her past rulings:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.resume/?iref=hpmostpop

None of it looks good. All of them overturned by SCOTUS.

Anyone who voted for Obama should be ashamed - of course that doesn't even matter in CA.

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 8:14 AM
The more I watch Obama's action the more I'm convinced that he is what his record says, despite his claims of looking for a common middle ground. What's so sad is that most people bought in to his sweet talks, instead of digging a little deeper at the truth - hoping some how, some way, big government would save them from themselves, their mortgages, finances, even at the cost of their freedom.

Based on a quick look at her record, it's pretty obvious that she's a racist, far left, judge activist. BTW racism is a two way street.

CNN Has a pretty understandable summary of her past rulings:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.resume/?iref=hpmostpop

None of it looks good. All of them overturned by SCOTUS.

Anyone who voted for Obama should be ashamed - of course that doesn't even matter in CA.

It matters here most , as posters here have to hold their nose and not vote Boxer or Feinstein or Pelosi in next elections they pop up in ...

bwiese
05-26-2009, 8:15 AM
Sonia Sotomayor replacing David Souter will not disturb the Heller 5 majority.

If the Republicans were so worried about her, they could've taken the trouble to win the election.

hawk81
05-26-2009, 8:18 AM
This is bad news for America, peoriod.

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 8:21 AM
Sonia Sotomayor replacing David Souter will not disturb the Heller 5 majority.

If the Republicans were so worried about her, they could've taken the trouble to win the election.

They ? (Does that mean when they pop up again for re-election you will vote for Boxer ,Feinstein or Pelosi ?) :eek:

berto
05-26-2009, 8:25 AM
She'll sail through unless she has a brain fart during the hearing. She was the obvious choice from the start.

bwiese
05-26-2009, 8:25 AM
They ? (Does that mean when they pop up again for re-election you will vote for Boxer ,Feinstein or Pelosi ?) :eek:

No but obviously the Repubs have alieanated a large enough fraction about population to render themselves losers.

Nationwide, they'll improve over time.

Statewide, I dunno - their platform has "loser" written all over it.

thomasanelson
05-26-2009, 8:26 AM
Wow...after reading the CNN summary I am worried about a lot more than just gun rights. A centerist she is not.

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 8:26 AM
It's not done for that reason.
The race and gender part is out there to stop those from voting against a person before they even look at their qualifications.:thumbsup:

Obama turns too Identity politics ? (Who woulda thunk it ):TFH:

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 8:28 AM
No but obviously the Repubs have alieanated a large enough fraction about population to render themselves losers.

Nationwide, they'll improve over time.

Statewide, I dunno - their platform has "loser" written all over it.

We should use a wedge issue and Identity politics to our favor with Latinos in 10 !:thumbsup:

MolonLabe2008
05-26-2009, 8:34 AM
Sonia Sotomayor replacing David Souter will not disturb the Heller 5 majority.

If the Republicans were so worried about her, they could've taken the trouble to win the election.

Let me guess. It was Palin's fault. Give me a F**king break.

McNuts is not much different than Obama and he still lost.

I and many others didn't vote for McNuts in the primary. So, don't blame me.

oldrifle
05-26-2009, 8:35 AM
Sotomayor says gun ownership is "unconstitutional". She wrote her theses on the subject.

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-gun-ownership.html

We're in trouble now.

Greg-Dawg
05-26-2009, 8:35 AM
She's from NY, nuff said.

gregorylucas
05-26-2009, 8:36 AM
Is it just me or did Sonia Sotomayor help create the circuit split that has now fasttracked incorporation to SCOTUS?

She obviously knew what she was doing in this ruling so maybe she's a closet 2A supporter? However, the chances of that are not good at all.

I can only hope she follows her own words:

"I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." - During a 1997 nomination hearing.

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 8:37 AM
Sotomayor says gun ownership is "unconstitutional". She wrote her theses on the subject.

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-gun-ownership.html

We're in trouble now.

The Posters here who continue to vote Democrat (Especially Anti 2A candidates) are not good for 2A !

MolonLabe2008
05-26-2009, 8:38 AM
No but obviously the Repubs have alieanated a large enough fraction about population to render themselves losers.

Nationwide, they'll improve over time.

Statewide, I dunno - their platform has "loser" written all over it.

Yeah. The GOP should become more like them. That way, there will not be any differences.

Yoorah, for the one party system!

:rolleyes:

nicki
05-26-2009, 8:42 AM
Let's use the Presser case against her, or more specifically Crunshiak.

It is not just guns, it is the whole bill of rights. If we allow selection of judges who pick and choose which parts of the bill of rights they like and don't like, we won't have a bill of rights.

Presser is tied in with Crunshiak. Unless Maloney is a total idiot and missed Crunshiak, the case on which Presser foundation is based on, if the republicans have any brains, they should tie her to Crunshiak.

The issue is how many of her rulings were overturned versus upheld by the SCOTUS is another issue, what is her batting average so to speak.

All these a legitimate questions, they aren't personal attacks.

On gun issues, Senator Feinstein is a waste of our time. If we are going to bother writing to her, it should be on upholding the whole bill of rightsl.

The best we can do is make it a political black mark on her. The only thing in our favor is she is getting old, hopefully she won't hang on like Sen R. Byrd ot Sen Strom Thurmond.

Other Senators may be worth writing to, even the new Dem Arlen Spector.

Spector may now be a Dem, but he could vote against her because she upheld Crunshiak.

If the Dems do vote to nominate her, we need to make sure that in doing so, they create a very public record of supporting a candidate who upheld the "Crunshiak decision" and then make ever effort we can to educate the public as to the history behind "Crunshiak".

If she is in the nomination and she apologizes for her ruling and admits she made a mistake, the public would probably forgive her.

Fortunately for us, her personal pride would probably prevent her from doing so.

Nicki

nicki
05-26-2009, 8:44 AM
Does anyone think Maloney may make a press statement on her selection and bring out that she upheld "Crunshiak", as such, she is unfit to be not only a SCOTUS judge, but a federal judge as well.

Nicki

Legasat
05-26-2009, 8:49 AM
Deleted

PatriotnMore
05-26-2009, 8:51 AM
Sotomayor is a graduate from Princeton University, where her legal theses included Race in the American Classroom, and Undying Injustice: American "Exceptionalism" and Permanent Bigotry, and Deadly Obsession: American Gun Culture. In this text, the student "Sotomayor explained that the Second Amendment to the Constitution did not actually afford individual citizens the right to bear arms, but only duly conferred organizations, like the military. Instead of making guns illegal, she argues that they have been illegal for individuals to own since the passing of the Bill of Rights."

Holy- I don't know Batman, and this comes from a Fed Judge, and now SCOTUS nominee. God help this country, our legal scholars at the collegiate level are broken, and fostering this type of legal minds. All the while allowing these kind of graduates to feel affirmed in their conclusions, by reading into a plain text document.

Is it a requirement that law students become well versed in early American history, as a requirement? Also, are the early American history books so wrong, and poorly accounted now days, that allow people to come to these types of conclusions?

John Browning
05-26-2009, 8:51 AM
If you want to ensure another attempt at Civil War and secession, she is perfect for the job. She couldn't be any more of a leftist activist if she tried, and I don't see her view of the Constitution going over well in most of the country.

She is a diabetic, so when the job is for life, that is the only potential upside I see.

Edit: After looking at her decisions, this lady doesn't have a shot. Many of her decisions were overturned UNANIMOUSLY by the Supreme Court, obvious proof she is into making law and has very little interest and/or ability to interpret it.

Legasat
05-26-2009, 8:51 AM
Sotomayor is a graduate from Princeton University, where her legal theses included Race in the American Classroom, and Undying Injustice: American "Exceptionalism" and Permanent Bigotry, and Deadly Obsession: American Gun Culture. In this text, the student Sotomayor explained that the Second Amendment to the Constitution did not actually afford individual citizens the right to bear arms, but only duly conferred organizations, like the military. Instead of making guns illegal, she argues that they have been illegal for individuals to own since the passing of the Bill of Rights.

Oh Yeah, she is going to help us a lot! </sarcasm>

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 8:52 AM
Yeah. The GOP should become more like them. That way, there will not be any differences.

Yoorah, for the one party system!

:rolleyes:

Extream Right & Extream Left a match made in heaven ?:TFH:

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 8:54 AM
Oh Yeah, she is going to help us a lot! </sarcasm>

Just as the posters here help us by voting for the Likes of Boxer, Feinstein & Pelosi & Obama ?

cindynles
05-26-2009, 8:58 AM
From Fox News:

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/05/26/blackwell_ken_obama_sotomayor/


President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor is a declaration of war against America’s gun owners and the Second Amendment to our Constitution. If gun owners mobilize and unite, it’s possible (though unlikely) to stop this radical nominee.

Last year the Supreme Court handed down the landmark decision in D.C. v. Heller, holding that the Second Amendment right to bear arms applies to individual citizens in their private lives. The ruling marked a turning point in gun rights in this country.

In the past year, the biggest question courts now face is whether the Second Amendment applies to the states. That may sound crazy, but the reality is that the Bill of Rights only controls the federal government, it doesn’t apply directly to states or cities. Only the parts of the Bill of Rights that are “incorporated” through the Fourteenth Amendment apply to the states.

Since the Heller decision, only two federal appeals courts have written on the Second Amendment. That’s six judges out of about 170. Of those six, three said the Second Amendment does apply to the states. And those judges were out of the liberal Ninth Circuit in California, and included a judge appointed by Bill Clinton and another appointed by Jimmy Carter. — Even leftist judges can get this.

But not Judge Sonia Sotomayor. She is one of only three federal appellate judges in America to issue a court opinion saying that the Second Amendment does not apply to states. The case was Maloney v. Cuomo, and it came down this past January.

That means if Chicago, or even the state of Illinois or New York, wants to ban you from owning any guns at all, even in your own house, that’s okay with her. According to Judge Sotomayor, if your state or city bans all guns the way Washington, D.C. did, that’s okay under the Constitution.

This issue could not be more important. Today, on the very day President Obama has announced Judge Sotomayor’s nomination, the National Rifle Association is arguing Second Amendment incorporation in court before the Seventh Circuit in a case challenging the Chicago ban on handguns.

If this case, or one like it, goes to the Supreme Court, Justice Sotomayor would say that Chicago can ban all your guns. If she can persuade her liberal colleagues on the Court to join her, it could become the law of the land that states and cities can ban guns. Should that happen, then you can expect anti-gun liberals in state legislatures to rush to pass new state laws doing exactly that.

The White House is telling us all about Judge Sotomayor’s compelling personal story — and it is an amazing story of what is possible “only in America.” But compelling personal stories are not the question. Miguel Estrada, whom President George W. Bush nominated to the D.C. Circuit appeals court and was planning on nominating to the Supreme Court, had a compelling story as a Hispanic immigrant who legally came to this country not even speaking English. Democrats filibustered Mr. Estrada.

Supporters point out that Judge Sotomayor was first appointed by George H.W. Bush for the federal trial court — before Bill Clinton elevated her to the Second Circuit appeals court. That’s true, but George H.W. Bush also gave us Justice David Souter, so clearly he wasn’t too careful about putting liberals on the federal bench. We can’t allow the left to hide behind the Bushes.

But when it comes to gun rights, we don’t need to guess. Judge Sotomayor has put in writing what she thinks. President Obama has nominated a radically anti-Second Amendment judge to be our newest Supreme Court justice.

There are a number of pro-Second Amendment Democratic senators from deeply red states, including Mark Begich from Alaska, Jon Tester and Max Baucus from Montana, Ben Nelson from Nebraska, Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad from North Dakota, and Tim Johnson from South Dakota.

These senators will jeopardize their seats if they vote to support an anti-gun radical for the Supreme Court. Second Amendment supporters will now be up in arms over this radical anti-Second Amendment nominee, and you should never underestimate the political power of American gun owners.

PatriotnMore
05-26-2009, 9:00 AM
On gun issues, Senator Feinstein is a waste of our time. If we are going to bother writing to her, it should be on upholding the whole bill of rightsl.Nicki

Lets not ignore Boxer, she is equally repugnant when it comes to 2A issues, and a few others. However, I feel it is our duty to inform them how we feel, Otherwise they feel they are right in their beliefs and representation.

dfletcher
05-26-2009, 9:04 AM
Is it just me or did Sonia Sotomayor help create the circuit split that has now fasttracked incorporation to SCOTUS?

She obviously knew what she was doing in this ruling so maybe she's a closet 2A supporter? However, the chances of that are not good at all.

I can only hope she follows her own words:

"I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." - During a 1997 nomination hearing.

Here's a paragraph from the earlier mentioned article:

Sotomayor is a graduate from Princeton University, where her legal theses included Race in the American Classroom, and Undying Injustice: American "Exceptionalism" and Permanent Bigotry, and Deadly Obsession: American Gun Culture. In this text, the student Sotomayor explained that the Second Amendment to the Constitution did not actually afford individual citizens the right to bear arms, but only duly conferred organizations, like the military. Instead of making guns illegal, she argues that they have been illegal for individuals to own since the passing of the Bill of Rights.

People of course can change and a college theses does not a court decision make, but in stating the Constitution should not bend she proceeds (pre-Heller of course) that the Constitution specifically bans private ownership of guns. So when someone states "I believe in interpreting the Constitution strictly" or "I believe the Constitution says what it says" you have to ask - well, what do you think it says?

There's a video floating around You Tube that has the President (then Senator I presume) stating the Warren Court was not at all radical because they dealt mostly with what the state could not do - couldn't search or question, sieze certain materials, etc. He then said the court should be in the business of not simply telling the state what it could not do, but should tell the state what it must do.

PatriotnMore
05-26-2009, 9:26 AM
People of course can change and a college theses does not a court decision make, but in stating the Constitution should not bend she proceeds (pre-Heller of course) that the Constitution specifically bans private ownership of guns. So when someone states "I believe in interpreting the Constitution strictly" or "I believe the Constitution says what it says" you have to ask - well, what do you think it says? .

Exactly.

Larua
05-26-2009, 9:27 AM
Sotomayor is a graduate from Princeton University, where her legal theses included Race in the American Classroom, and Undying Injustice: American "Exceptionalism" and Permanent Bigotry, and Deadly Obsession: American Gun Culture. In this text, the student "Sotomayor explained that the Second Amendment to the Constitution did not actually afford individual citizens the right to bear arms, but only duly conferred organizations, like the military. Instead of making guns illegal, she argues that they have been illegal for individuals to own since the passing of the Bill of Rights."

This doesn't pass my smell test.

A quick google search for the titles of these theses shows that the only indexed results originate from one blog.

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-gun-ownership.html

She did graduate from Princeton according to http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=2243.

Time will tell.

dg29
05-26-2009, 9:29 AM
"I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it." - During a 1997 nomination hearing.

Actions have always spoken louder than words. If one looks at her documented record the tale is told. From here on out I'll speak of her as Sonia Sodomizer of the US Constitution.
Then again, what kind of nominee did we actually expect from a graduate of the Saul Alinsky "Rules for Radicals" University?

PatriotnMore
05-26-2009, 9:30 AM
This doesn't pass my smell test.

A quick google search for the titles of these theses shows that the only indexed results originate from one blog.

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-gun-ownership.html

She did graduate from Princeton according to http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=2243.

Time will tell.

Hmmm, you may be correct, I'll have to dig a bit more, and hopefully confirm, or deny.

TatankaGap
05-26-2009, 9:32 AM
She's an idiot when it comes to the 2A - she ruled against incorporation of the 2A and Heller into the states in the numchuck case - contrary to Nordyke - basically trading out one worthless justice for another when it comes to the 2A -

Personally, it looks to me like she decides how the law should be changed and tries to change it - she would be considered a non-originalist; and more like a 'legislative' judge -

I'd expect that her opinions would make murky areas of the law more murky and confuse other areas of the law that are currently fairly clear by virtue of her being an activist law-making judge -

IMHO -with any luck, she'll have a tax problem or maybe she has a history of hiring undocumented household help or failed to withhold the taxes or paid them off the books ;)

Mulay El Raisuli
05-26-2009, 9:35 AM
I'm a bit confused. Isn't this the same lady judge that Clarence Thomas is such a fan of?

The Raisuli

truthseeker
05-26-2009, 10:06 AM
Well here we go again!

I can see that when the "gun community" reads all of this, the ammo and gun shortage is probably going to get even worse!

TatankaGap
05-26-2009, 10:07 AM
Well here we go again!

I can see that when the "gun community" reads all of this, the ammo and gun shortage is probably going to get even worse!

Not necessarily - Souter was in the 4 minority in Heller; Sotomayor would just replace Souter as a naysayer - no change in the ratio of the majority -

Steyr_223
05-26-2009, 10:08 AM
I'm a bit confused. Isn't this the same lady judge that Clarence Thomas is such a fan of?

The Raisuli

That is interesting, do you have a link? I would like to read more. Thanks!

truthseeker
05-26-2009, 10:09 AM
Not necessarily - Souter was in the 4 minority in Heller; Sotomayor would just replace Souter as a naysayer - no change in the ratio of the majority -

I KNOW that, but a lot of the gun boards that I read will take this as "Our 2A rights will disappear if she gets into SCOTUS".

mblat
05-26-2009, 10:14 AM
I'm a bit confused. Isn't this the same lady judge that Clarence Thomas is such a fan of?

The Raisuli

I am not sure how is it relevant. It is well known that Scalia and Ginsburg are good friends.... That doesn't make them any closer on judicial philosophy.

bulgron
05-26-2009, 10:18 AM
If she's as bad as some seem to fear she is, this nomination ought to bring a lot of pro-gun voters who have been voting Dem to their senses in the mid-terms.

It's critical that the Republicans pick up at least a few Senate seats in the mid-terms so as to give them a solid hold on the ability to filibuster.

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 10:22 AM
If she's as bad as some seem to fear she is, this nomination ought to bring a lot of pro-gun voters who have been voting Dem to their senses in the mid-terms.

It's critical that the Republicans pick up at least a few Senate seats in the mid-terms so as to give them a solid hold on the ability to filibuster.

Nicely said !:thumbsup:

berto
05-26-2009, 10:24 AM
I'm a bit confused. Isn't this the same lady judge that Clarence Thomas is such a fan of?

The Raisuli

Ol' Clarence is likely a fan of something other than her judicial philosophy.

berto
05-26-2009, 10:26 AM
I'm a bit confused. Isn't this the same lady judge that Clarence Thomas is such a fan of?

The Raisuli

Ol' Clarence is likely a fan of something other than her judicial philosophy.

st.clouds
05-26-2009, 10:31 AM
If she's as bad as some seem to fear she is, this nomination ought to bring a lot of pro-gun voters who have been voting Dem to their senses in the mid-terms.

It's critical that the Republicans pick up at least a few Senate seats in the mid-terms so as to give them a solid hold on the ability to filibuster.

She's *significantly* much worse than I was hoping for, when Obama said he'd pick a moderate judge.

PatriotnMore
05-26-2009, 10:47 AM
I
Additional pages
http://www.pace.edu/page.cfm?doc_id=7771
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2246845/posts
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2009/05/almanac-of-the-federal-judiciary---sonia-sotomayor.php?page=1
http://www.pointoflaw.com/
http://www.law.louisville.edu/node/3243
"Dave Kopel (http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_05_24-2009_05_30.shtml#1243356423), Research Director at the Independence Institute:Judge Sotomayor's record suggests hostility, rather than empathy, for the tens of millions of Americans who exercise their right to keep and bear arms." http://74.125.155.132 (http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:lR89YuQC-JIJ:www.reason.com/blog+Sonia+Sotomayor+thesis&cd=59&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a)
/search?q=cache:lR89YuQC-JIJ:www.reason.com/blog+Sonia+Sotomayor+thesis&cd=59&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a (http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:lR89YuQC-JIJ:www.reason.com/blog+Sonia+Sotomayor+thesis&cd=59&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a)
"Judge Sotomayor, a New York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo. This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nordyke v. King case in California that the Second Amendment is incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090526/pl_usnw/sotomayor_nomination_an_obama_slap_at_second_amend ment
"
Speaking at Duke University in 2005, Sotomayor said, “All of the legal defense funds out there, they’re looking for people with court of appeals experience” because “the court of appeals is where policy is made.”
She then sought to soften the statement, adding lightly, “I know this is on tape and I should never say that, because we don’t make law, I know. Um, okay. I know. I’m not promoting it, I’m not advocating it.” The audience laughed as she brushed off the statement, perhaps sarcastically." http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:uYPYsBUOK6kJ:www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/05/06/judge-sonia-sotomayors-philosophy-of-judging/+Sotomayor+on+second+amendment&cd=24&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

(http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:uYPYsBUOK6kJ:www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/05/06/judge-sonia-sotomayors-philosophy-of-judging/+Sotomayor+on+second+amendment&cd=24&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a)

TatankaGap
05-26-2009, 11:00 AM
Maybe Sotomayor is 'Bama's Bork/Meiers? ~ he'll use her as a lightning rod to pick up all the flak that the conservatives/GOP have and once exhausted and she is defeated, he'll put up his real number one choice, Diane Wood (his former colleague from UofC law school and a good long-time friend to 'Bama) - also no friend to the 2A but who is also a critically thinking revisionist and would likely be a much more formidable liberal justice than Sotomayor -

I bet 'Bama is thinking this is win-win: if he gets Sotomayor on the Court, a huge win for him; if she gets dinked, then the opposition has blown all its resources opposing Sotomayor and Diane Wood is a shoe-in -

Watch out :eek:

PatriotnMore
05-26-2009, 11:12 AM
She's *significantly* much worse than I was hoping for, when Obama said he'd pick a moderate judge.

He will never pick a moderate 2A judge. The opportunity to replace one liberal for another will not be missed. The questions is, how liberal can they get away with.

tonelar
05-26-2009, 11:15 AM
looks like she's the tip of the iceberg

Gator Monroe? Are you ok?

swhatb
05-26-2009, 11:24 AM
great... who needs to listen to the supreme court anyways :confused:

Second Amendment: Sotomayor was also a member of the panel that issued a per curiam opinion in another controversial case that may be headed for the Court next year. In Maloney v. Cuomo, 554 F.3d 56 (2009), the panel considered (as relevant here) a claim by a New York attorney that a state law prohibiting possession of a chuka stick (also known as nunchaku, a device used in martial arts consisting of two sticks joined by a rope or chain) violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms. The district court rejected the claim on the ground that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. On appeal, the panel affirmed. Relying on the Supreme Court’s 1886 decision in Presser v. Illinois, it explained that it was “settled law . . . that the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose” on the individual’s right to bear arms. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court continued, “does not invalidate this longstanding principle.” And while acknowledging the possibility that “Heller might be read to question the continuing validity of this principle,” the panel deemed itself bound to follow Presser because it “directly controls, leaving to the Supreme Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions.” Maloney’s lawyers intend to file a petition for certiorari in late June.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/judge-sotomayors-appellate-opinions-in-civil-cases/

On first Amendment issues and "DOUCHEBAGS":

http://paullevinson.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayors-anti-first-amendment.html

On White Women and Hispanics being better judges, and her racist views (Volokh)


http://volokh.com/posts/1242399411.shtml


Every step the man takes shows the fastest path to destroying virtually everything this country stood for, and "progressive" isn't quite the word that comes to mind.

p.s.: I am both of a Hispanic origin and parents, was raised in various Latin countries until 16, and the appointment of this woman is embarrassing in my opinion.

Fate
05-26-2009, 11:26 AM
Gator, today is NOT Groundhog Day. ;)

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 11:28 AM
looks like she's the tip of the iceberg

Gator Monroe? Are you ok?

Will not fall off the wagon over this ruling (BTW was this ruling by the 9th Jerkit Court of shlemiels ?)

nick
05-26-2009, 11:37 AM
She's *significantly* much worse than I was hoping for, when Obama said he'd pick a moderate judge.

It's all a matter fo perspective. To Obama, himself a far-left liberal, someone who doesn't join protests and dances on the streets with a hairdo ful of maggots is a moderate.

That being said, I suggest each of you considers a donation to NRA-ILA. I'm sending mine on the 1st of June, unless I feel compelled to send an unscheduled one.

madmike
05-26-2009, 11:38 AM
Sonia Sotomayor replacing David Souter will not disturb the Heller 5 majority.

If the Republicans were so worried about her, they could've taken the trouble to win the election.

Oh no he didn't!!! :eek:

Very true, unfortunatly...

-madmike.

Bad Voodoo
05-26-2009, 11:44 AM
The crux of a dying party:


Robert Bork, who was nominated by President Ronald Reagan for the Supreme Court in 1987 and later denied confirmation, told FOXNews.com that Sotomayor will "face very few tough questions."

"I don't think that Republicans will put up much of a fight. They never have," he said.

Bork suggested that Republicans are likely to back away from tough questions because of the "sympathetic nature of her life experience."

CowboyShooter
05-26-2009, 11:46 AM
I expect to see less guns and more "migrant workers" in California.

Don't you mean "citizens"?


Give me an "A"

Give me an "M"

Give me an "E"

Give me an "N"

Give me an "I"

Give me an "S"

Give me a "T"

Give me a "Y"




:(

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 11:46 AM
The crux of a dying party:

Dying party that will regain the House & Senate in 10 !:TFH:

Bad Voodoo
05-26-2009, 11:50 AM
Dying party that will regain the House & Senate in 10 !:TFH:

I'll be voting for independent thinkers the next go-round, whether they're (R), (D), (I), (L), (G), or alien. Ideologues need not apply. Ideology is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Gator Monroe
05-26-2009, 11:52 AM
I'll be voting for independent thinkers the next go-round, whether they're (R), (D), (I), (L), (G), or alien. Ideologues need not apply. Ideology is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Conservative independant thinkers are pro 2A (IF THAT HELPS)

ke6guj
05-26-2009, 11:57 AM
Don't you mean "citizens"?


Give me an "A"

Give me an "M"

Give me an "E"

Give me an "N"

Give me an "I"

Give me an "S"

Give me a "T"

Give me a "Y"




:(It would be better if you spelled it correctly :D

Bad Voodoo
05-26-2009, 11:58 AM
Conservative independant thinkers are pro 2A (IF THAT HELPS)

Just as long as you don't continue to make the mistake, like we all have, that conservative values are representative of this (R) party. It's become damagingly apparent that the two are no longer mutually exclusive.

CA357
05-26-2009, 12:02 PM
Sotomayor is on record publicly as stating that the Second Amendment has been wrongly interpreted for years. She states that it means only the military and law enforcement have the right to keep and bear arms.

Stay alert gents.

PolishMike
05-26-2009, 1:14 PM
Don't you mean "citizens"?


Give me an "A"

Give me an "M"

Give me an "E"

Give me an "N"

Give me an "I"

Give me an "S"

Give me a "T"

Give me a "Y"




:(

wow...

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c50/sharibrown/mini-023_fail.jpg

dfletcher
05-26-2009, 1:42 PM
Maybe she didn't pay her taxes and has an illegal "nanny"?

Bad Voodoo
05-26-2009, 1:44 PM
Maybe she didn't pay her taxes and has an illegal "nanny"?

One we're almost sure of, considering Obama's track record for nominating the dregs of our political elite. :thumbsup:

dixieD
05-26-2009, 3:34 PM
Sotomayor says gun ownership is "unconstitutional". She wrote her theses on the subject.

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-gun-ownership.html

We're in trouble now.

Wow. We sure are. "Guns have been illegal since the passage of the Bill of Rights." Makes me really wonder now by Obama won't release his dissertation.

dixieD
05-26-2009, 3:37 PM
Maybe she didn't pay her taxes and has an illegal "nanny"?

Of course she hasn't and did. That is a requirement now.

Model X
05-26-2009, 3:40 PM
Yeah. The GOP should become more like them. That way, there will not be any differences.

Yoorah, for the one party system!

:rolleyes:

No, the GOP should move back to CONSERVATISM and not the MORAL MAJORITY stuff that people have gotten sick of.

thats hardly the same as being like Democrats.

Charliegone
05-26-2009, 3:45 PM
No, the GOP should move back to CONSERVATISM and not the MORAL MAJORITY stuff that people have gotten sick of.

thats hardly the same as being like Democrats.

Exactly!

vrand
05-26-2009, 3:50 PM
Here is a interesting comment by her.

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, she said, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."

So she lied to get in.

bodger
05-26-2009, 3:55 PM
Here is a interesting comment by her.

At her Senate confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, she said, "I don't believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it."

Well, I hope when, not if, she starts to chip away at the Second Amendment, somebody throws those words back out at her.

Sam
05-26-2009, 3:58 PM
Her voice is like nails on a chalkboard. I can't say that I'm surprised by this choice but luckily Obama is replacing one liberal justice for another.

yellowfin
05-26-2009, 3:59 PM
Block her nomination, then move for disbarral.

DDT
05-26-2009, 4:01 PM
Which president a Supreme Court Justice resigns under is always more telling than which president appointed him or her.

anthonyca
05-26-2009, 4:06 PM
So is the NRA going to "score" the confirmation votes? It would be quite pleasing to see one anti-gun candidate after another go down in flames until Obama is forced to appoint someone reasonable... But this is probably wishful thinking, and it may not be good strategy for the NRA to even attempt...

Of the 90million gun owners only 4 million are in the NRA. If only half of gun owners would stand up and join this would be no problem.

DDT
05-26-2009, 4:13 PM
Sotomayor says gun ownership is "unconstitutional". She wrote her theses on the subject.

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/05/sotomayor-gun-ownership.html

We're in trouble now.

There is enough bad about this nominee that we don't need to be passing on misinformation. http://volokh.com/posts/1243364874.shtml

Bad Voodoo
05-26-2009, 4:13 PM
Well, I hope when, not if, she starts to chip away at the Second Amendment, somebody throws those words back out at her.

At that point it won't matter any longer. It's not like the traitor can be recalled.

st.clouds
05-26-2009, 4:43 PM
There is enough bad about this nominee that we don't need to be passing on misinformation. http://volokh.com/posts/1243364874.shtml

That's a relief... however small that may be.

Gray Peterson
05-26-2009, 4:57 PM
If the Republicans in the Senate were not so anti-gay and threatening to filibuster any gay SCOTUS nominee we would have likely had Kathleen Sullivan as the nominee. Definitely liberal, but also pro-individual right of the 2nd amendment. Thanks GOP!

mblat
05-26-2009, 4:58 PM
If the Republicans in the Senate were not so anti-gay and threatening to filibuster any gay SCOTUS nominee we would have likely had Kathleen Sullivan as the nominee. Definitely liberal, but also pro-individual right of the 2nd amendment. Thanks GOP!

Is that actually true story? Any references to it? Not like this surprises me, but still....

EDIT: Besides..... Considering that GOP has ONLY 40 seats..... it is really hard to imagine them managing ANY filibuster, much less over sexual orientation of SCOTUS nominee... It would take only one RINO to break it..... and I am quite certain there are more than one in the Senate....

Mr. Beretta
05-26-2009, 5:07 PM
God help us all!

dfletcher
05-26-2009, 5:22 PM
If the Republicans in the Senate were not so anti-gay and threatening to filibuster any gay SCOTUS nominee we would have likely had Kathleen Sullivan as the nominee. Definitely liberal, but also pro-individual right of the 2nd amendment. Thanks GOP!

We're to presume then that Sullivan is gay and Sotomayor is not? I don't know (or care) one way or the other - but I do think responsibility for the nomination rests with the President, not what the very much in the minority Republican Party may or may not do.

lioneaglegriffin
05-26-2009, 7:00 PM
i got this email from Brad from the Gun Owners for Obama group. ( i know, i know i joined many election email lists, including Hillary Clinton, DNC, RNC and McCain [i even get email from Barbra Boxer for some reason?(my guess is the DNC gave my email to her.)] emails so simmer down.)

FYI " here is a summary of Judge Sotomayor’s opinions:

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/judge-sotomayors-appellate-opinions-in-civil-cases/

The only relevant case I know is Pappas, where she held that because the 2nd Am has not been applied to the States, a state law barring the carrying of numbchucks did not implicate the 2nd Am. I am hoping that the Pappas opinion shows her to have centrist tendencies on this issue (If she were more to the right, she could have cited the Miller case, to say that numbchucks are not useful as a weapon of war and so are not protected by the 2d Am, or if she were more to the left, she could have said he had no individual right to be armed.



My hope is that the Dem Party as a whole takes the States Rights approach to the 2d Am (that Sotomayor has done so far...), so that this regional issue can remain regional (instead of partisan " because WITHIN the party a federal approach to this issue divides and defeats us in most election years, where even a weak 2d Am Repub can steal away significant votes by paying lip-service to the 2dAm).



Within the States, I think people can agree on what is “reasonable” regulation of firearms (such as what features are reasonable and what are not), but nationally the South, Southwest, Rocky Mountain States, and Alaska irreconcilably disagree with the Northeast and West Coast States. The anti-gun regions are more likely to address gun control from buzzwords (like “assault weapon”) without a real understanding of what the actual features are or the relative lethality of movie styled weapons versus common hunting weapons (which are often much more lethal). Likewise, pro-gun states are more likely to think the 2d Am applies to the States the same as the Federal Govt, ignoring the long history of cities and states regulating the carrying of firearms. I think the 3rd or last approach of the Democratic party, by creating a federal distinction between rural/urban gun rights is doomed (protecting “sporting use” but not “self-defensive” use, and discriminating against those who live in urban or inner city areas " as if they have less of a right of self defense). As the JFPO pointed out, the “sporting use” exception was copied in the 1968 gun control act from transations done at Neuremburg " taken from Hitler’s gun control act (albeit arguably older than Hitler). It is not consistent with the American legal tradition or the Constitution.



So, I really hope that Sotomayor signals a return to a 2d Am approach that is Constitutional (because lately both sides have drifted away in the vacuum of ignorance on the 2d Am). Only time will tell... Heller has shed light on this right rarely addressed by the SCOTUS. And I’ve probably offended everyone on both sides with my take on it, but I think this is the center, and the closest to the actual legal precedent which also provides a way through the political pitfalls of the last few elections.



Thoughts...

lioneaglegriffin
05-26-2009, 7:12 PM
also here are the talking points obama is going to use to sell her to the public.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pTKTCgznoAQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pTKTCgznoAQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Maestro Pistolero
05-26-2009, 7:16 PM
If the Republicans in the Senate were not so anti-gay and threatening to filibuster any gay SCOTUS nominee we would have likely had Kathleen Sullivan as the nominee. Definitely liberal, but also pro-individual right of the 2nd amendment. Thanks GOP!

Maybe that is part of the strategy, and Sotomayer is the throw away candidate, to be followed by Sullivan for the win.

mblat
05-26-2009, 7:34 PM
Maybe that is part of the strategy, and Sotomayer is the throw away candidate, to be followed by Sullivan for the win.

No. To rescind SCOTUS nominee is MAJOR defeat for any administration. Nobody in the right mind would do it. Especially considering that Dems have commanding position in congress anyway any half way plausible nomination would likely to be approved.

berto
05-26-2009, 7:38 PM
Maybe that is part of the strategy, and Sotomayer is the throw away candidate, to be followed by Sullivan for the win.

There's almost no chance of Sotomayor not getting confirmed. She'd have to eat a baby.

kperry
05-26-2009, 7:49 PM
No, the GOP should move back to CONSERVATISM and not the MORAL MAJORITY stuff that people have gotten sick of.

thats hardly the same as being like Democrats.

Hey, if they do that, I might actually have to join them if they ever manage to get there!


I haven't seen very much of Sotomayor's record and quoted philosophy until now, but so far, I'm not really impressed. Looks like Obama did make this nomination based on race and gender. We'll see how things go as things move along towards the confirmation hearings, and if any skeletons show up.

ChuckBooty
05-26-2009, 8:49 PM
I'm not even sure that this woman will get nominated. All this crap she said about hispanic women being better than white men or whatever. She seems like a disaster waiting to happen.

vrand
05-26-2009, 9:14 PM
I'm not even sure that this woman will get nominated. All this crap she said about hispanic women being better than white men or whatever. She seems like a disaster waiting to happen.

Obama's Harriet Miers :43:

MT1
05-26-2009, 9:40 PM
Just FYI: here is the moveon.org email sent out today...

Dear MoveOn member,

Today, President Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be the next U.S. Supreme Court justice. Of course, the Right is already fighting against her confirmation—so we need to get the facts out about her impressive qualifications and background.

Below is a list of 10 key things about Sonia Sotomayor that you might not know. Can you check it out and send it to 10 friends today? If each of us forwards the list, we can start to get the word out about Judge Sotomayor, and help to ensure that she gets a speedy and fair confirmation process.

Ten Things To Know About Judge Sonia Sotomayor

1. Judge Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the bench than any Supreme Court justice in 100 years. Over her three-decade career, she has served in a wide variety of legal roles, including as a prosecutor, litigator, and judge.

2. Judge Sotomayor is a trailblazer. She was the first Latina to serve on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and was the youngest member of the court when appointed to the District Court for the Southern District of New York. If confirmed, she will be the first Hispanic to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court.

3. While on the bench, Judge Sotomayor has consistently protected the rights of working Americans, ruling in favor of health benefits and fair wages for workers in several cases.

4. Judge Sotomayor has shown strong support for First Amendment rights, including in cases of religious expression and the rights to assembly and free speech.

5. Judge Sotomayor has a strong record on civil rights cases, ruling for plaintiffs who had been discriminated against based on disability, sex and race.

6. Judge Sotomayor embodies the American dream. Born to Puerto Rican parents, she grew up in a South Bronx housing project and was raised from age nine by a single mother, excelling in school and working her way to graduate summa cum laude from Princeton University and to become an editor of the Law Journal at Yale Law School.

7. In 1995, Judge Sotomayor "saved baseball" when she stopped the owners from illegally changing their bargaining agreement with the players, thereby ending the longest professional sports walk-out in history.

8. Judge Sotomayor ruled in favor of the environment in a case of protecting aquatic life in the vicinity of power plants in 2007, a decision that was overturned by the Roberts Supreme Court.

9. In 1992, Judge Sotomayor was confirmed by the Senate without opposition after being appointed to the bench by George H.W. Bush.

10. Judge Sotomayor is a widely respected legal figure, having been described as "...an outstanding colleague with a keen legal mind," "highly qualified for any position in which wisdom, intelligence, collegiality and good character would be assets," and "a role model of aspiration, discipline, commitment, intellectual prowess and integrity."

Judge Sotomayor is an historic, uniquely qualified nominee to the Supreme Court. Let's get the word out and make sure we get a prompt, fair confirmation on her nomination.

Thanks for all you do,

–Nita, Kat, Daniel, Ilyse and the rest of the team

Sources for each of the 10 things:

1. White House Statement, May 26, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51451&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=1

2. White House Statement, May 26, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51451&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=2

3. Cases: Archie v. Grand Cent. Partnership, 997 F. Supp. 504 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) and Marcella v. Capital Dist. Physicians' Health Plan, Inc., 293 F.3d 42 (2d Cir. 2002).

4. Cases: Flamer v. White Plains, 841 F. Supp. 1365 (S.D.N.Y. 1993), Ford v. McGinnis, 352 F.3d 382 (2d Cir. 2003), and Campos v. Coughlin, 854 F. Supp. 194 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).

5a. "Sotomayor's Notable Court Opinions and Articles," The New York Times, May 26, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51454&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=3

5b. Cases: Bartlett v. N.Y. State Board, 970 F. Supp. 1094 (S.D.N.Y. 1997), Greenbaum v. Svenska Hendelsbanken, 67 F.Supp.2d 228 (S.D.N.Y. 1999), Raniola v. Bratton, 243 F.3d 610 (2d Cir. 2001), and Gant v. Wallingford Board of Education, 195 F.3d 134 (2d Cir. 1999).

6. "Sonia Sotomayor: 10 Things You Should Know," The Huffington Post, May 26, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51452&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=4

7. "How Sotomayor 'Saved' Baseball," Time, May 26, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51455&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=5

8. "Sotomayor's resume, record on notable cases," CNN, May 26, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51453&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=6

9. "Sotomayor's resume, record on notable cases," CNN, May 26, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51453&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=7

10a. Judge Richard C. Wesley, a George W. Bush appointee to the Second Circuit.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51451&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=8

10b. "Sotomayor is Highly Qualified," The Wall Street Journal, May 9, 2009.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51456&id=16226-5600754-vwWrdKx&t=9

10c. Honorary Degree Citation, Pace University School of Law, 2003 Commencement.

:rolleyes:

Mulay El Raisuli
05-27-2009, 4:54 AM
That is interesting, do you have a link? I would like to read more. Thanks!


My apologies. Justice Thomas is a big fan of the other minority woman on an appellate court. The one from Georgia.

Sorry.

The Raisuli

lioneaglegriffin
05-27-2009, 11:50 AM
when they teach social history today it's all about the evil white men and their slaves. I took one honors humanities class where the focus for the entire semester was about how the culture, including the U.S. Constitution created by the white english speaking males was evil. They got a little miffed and lectured me about being objective when I wrote a paper exposing the practices of the Aztecs and suggesting the "cultural imperialism" of the Spanish was good and elevated the MesoAmericans to a more civil society because it ended human sacrifice. The white guys that embodied the principle of individual Liberty into a written Constitution were far more evil than those that filet the living, eat their beating heart and wear their victims skin. Of course this was done after a few weeks of physical and psychedelic torture. So go to College and learn about the poor oppressed peoples and how evil white males are but don't mention the babies the Aztecs buried alive in caves so they could listen to their screams at night while tripping on good dope.

MY history prof. taught us that pilgrim were a bunch of xenophobic freaks in a cult. :D

rabagley
05-27-2009, 5:53 PM
MY history prof. taught us that pilgrim were a bunch of xenophobic freaks in a cult. :D

Well, he got that right. The pilgrims fled religious persecution from England to Holland, then found that they couldn't dictate the church their children attended and fled religious freedom in Holland to the new world where they could set their own rules.

lioneaglegriffin
05-27-2009, 6:28 PM
Well, he got that right. The pilgrims fled religious persecution from England to Holland, then found that they couldn't dictate the church their children attended and fled religious freedom in Holland to the new world where they could set their own rules.

it was a woman you sexist lol :p

anyway pretty much yea their kids were speaking the native tounge and they freaked out.

Timberline
05-27-2009, 6:40 PM
Obama's Harriet Miers :43:

Harriet Miers was a terrible choice for SCOTUS, I can't imagine what happened to allow that lapse of judgement in the Bush Whitehouse. But Sotomayor has actual Judicial experience, and isn't just an enamoured member of the C-in-C's entourage. Where do you see the comparison?