Tweet
SCOTUS blog has been posting on Sotomayor’s record as a judge.
The link below should bring up the list. I am reading through it, but I am not a lawyer. I would be interested in informed comments, either here or elsewhere at FDL on Sotomayor’s record.
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/?s=Sotomayor
If the link doesn’t work just go to SCOTUS blog and search for ‘Sotomayor’.
Thanks for great work by FDL and Oxdown posters on hateful and ruthless wingnut sh*tsorm of lies and defamation over Sotomayor confirmation. I think that there needs to be maximum pushback against this hateful and dangerous campaign that they are waging.
I think it would be a good idea to forward some of the FDL posts that reveal the obvious double standard that the reactionaries are using to judge Sotomayor to the media news and opinion divas, and members of the judiciary committee. Those posts are the best summaries of the wingnut nonsense and lies that I have seen.
2 Comments
Although we like to think of ourselves as a “nation of law, not men” such is not the case because as Sotomayor points out we cannot leave our world view behind and even if we could, it wouldn’t mean we were right. The fact the Supreme Court reverses Sotomayor (and I’m not sure that is the fact)means nothing as Supremes are as falible as anyone. Historically speaking the justices we remember(and we don’t remember that many)are the justices that turned out to be right, that is validated by the future. The Supreme Court’s history is filled with decisions which subsequent generations forgot. Once child labor laws were overturned on the grounds the kid didn’t have to work if he didn’t want to. (freedom of contract) Holmes, known as “the great dissenter”, is remembered because his dissents eventually became law. If the law were as towering and accurate as we like to believe, there would be no dissenting opinions.
It is instructive to remember Plessey v Ferguson, the case that approved “separate but equal” facilities for blacks on trains. The lone dissenter, the first John Harlan, said the constitution must be color blind. He listed all the evils the majority was loosing on the nation. He hit every nail exactly on the head. In the end the nation survived segregation. It will survive the worst Alito, Roberts and Scalia will do. It will be painful, but it will survive.
I spoke too soon in this post. I claimed that SCOTUS posts were informative based on the ones that I read last night, that a normal person could understand -as opposed to a dang lawyer.
I hope the ones on the appeals and and some of the civil case posts are informative –to a lawyer. I can’t follow what the heck they are talking about.
I never ever want to hear any lawyer making snarky comments about economics or statistics jargon after reading some of these posts. Why can’t lawyers talk English. They trials are held in English, right? So why can’t the lawyers talk about them in English?
Anyway, for those qualified to understand some of this stuff, I guess all of them are informative. I will assume so on the basis of the ones I could understand.