Obama picks Sotomayor for SCOTUS slot
posted at 9:24 am on May 26, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Sometimes, the heavy favorites win the horse race. According to the AP, Barack Obama will announce that he has chosen Sonia Sotomayor to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court. That allows Obama to appoint another woman and the first Hispanic to the nation’s highest court, giving him another little slice of history:
Officials tell The Associated Press that President Barack Obama intends to nominate federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor as the first Hispanic to serve on the Supreme Court.
Karl Rove says that Sotomayor could be even more liberal than Souter, and that conservatives might feel compelled to push to block her based on her rulings from the appellate court (via Mitch Berg, from earlier this month):
Wendy Long at Bench Memos sums up in brief the case against Sotomayor as a liberal activist, the kind which Sen. Ben Nelson said he’d oppose, including this tidbit:
She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court.
I’d like to see some data on this. If true, it could hand the Republicans a pretty damning bit of evidence, assuming that they’ll even go on the warpath over Sotomayor. I rather doubt they will, for a couple of reasons. First, they’ll likely get intimidated by the Hispanic pressure groups anxious to get a seat on the Supreme Court for the first time ever (unless one counts Benjamin Cardozo, of Portuguese ancestry, as a Hispanic).
Second, and more to the point, Sotomayor has been on the public short list the entire time, and the GOP has trained its guns elsewhere. They’ve been warning more about Elaine Kagan and Diane Wood, barely giving Sotomayor any notice at all. Republicans have also focused on the executive-branch appointments of Dawn Johnsen and Harold Koh, two radical activists, during this period. That public campaign may have made Sotomayor look less radical and activist in comparison, which makes a big public push less likely to succeed.
We shall soon see. Keep an eye on reactions from red-state Democrats, especially Ben Nelson, to see if the GOP can hope to cobble a coalition large enough to keep Sotomayor off the court — and whether Obama might pick someone worse if they do.
And, again … elections have consequences. This is one of them.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Like I said in the headlines, The One is going to pick someone hideously unpalatable no matter what, so I can’t say I care much one way or the other.
He won.
Abby Adams on May 26, 2009 at 9:26 AM
The end is nigh.
OldEnglish on May 26, 2009 at 9:27 AM
she is the first openly activist self-avowed “policy maker” to get nominated….
“I won”
sven10077 on May 26, 2009 at 9:28 AM
But…she’s empathetic. That’s all we members of the Proletariat need to know.
kingsjester on May 26, 2009 at 9:28 AM
The only upside is that she appears to be… shall we say… not the sharpest judicial knife in the drawer. Sure, she’ll be the nauseatingly consistent liberal vote that Souter always was, but she won’t be “shaping” the court with her superior brain power. Good lord, pray for the health of Scalia and Thomas!
And yes, elections (or coronations in this case) have consequences.
Sugar Land on May 26, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Ed I think Benjamin Cardozo was Sephardim.
elduende on May 26, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Birds of a feather flock together.
The fact that Obama chose an activist does not surprise me at all.
However, this decision has Hillary Clinton’s fingerprints all over it.
MB007 on May 26, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Sotomayor… Sounds like a Level Boss on the PS/3…
Mazztek on May 26, 2009 at 9:30 AM
She is a racist end of story. She has something against white people and I say this as a hispanic myself.
TimeTraveler on May 26, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Ed, she may be a crappy pick (I thinks so) but is she a qualified pick? Unless you want to behave like the Left has with every judicial appointment made by any Republican, you had best have something other than – “she sucks”. Advise and consent isn’t “pick someone we want”. What should apply to the Left should also apply to everyone else.
Point out how bad she is, remind everyone that elections have consequences and letting Mr.”I won” do stuff like this should be a reason to vote against him next election and his party in Congressional elections next year.
LTC John on May 26, 2009 at 9:31 AM
NBC: Would Republicans dare vote against first Hispanic?
……
There’s journalism for you.
First Q is about ethnicity/race.
Not about qualifications/experience or judicial philosophy.
Disgusting.
artist on May 26, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Maybe he is first nominating some one sooooo to the left that when he puts forth his real pic she’ll seem like a lightweight?
- The Cat
MirCat on May 26, 2009 at 9:32 AM
Yes, it’s true she is a leftest of the worst kind. But an intellectual lightweight. She won’t shape the court. We will spend a lot of time laughing at incoherent positions.
conservnut on May 26, 2009 at 9:32 AM
La Raza?
Juan Hernandez approves.
“Oh, come on, Mee-shell! Have a heart!”
MadisonConservative on May 26, 2009 at 9:33 AM
Didn’t democrats filibuster hispanic picks of Bush for the Court of Appeals. I guess it only matters when republicans do it because they are racists.
bopbottle on May 26, 2009 at 9:34 AM
If Sotomayor is reversed a lot, wouldn’t the counter argument be that she is right and the high court is wrong and that having her on the high court will bring us true justice at last?
Especially if we are now the United States of Empathy…
myrenovations on May 26, 2009 at 9:35 AM
What decisions of hers have you read that make you think she’s an intellectual lightweight?
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 9:35 AM
We will spend a lot of time laughing at incoherent positions.
conservnut on May 26, 2009 at 9:32 AM
And shuddering at the votes she makes.
I’d like to know her stance on guns because that fight is coming.
Bishop on May 26, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Obama is the master of deception.
He uses distraction to get what he wants and Sotomayor is just that.
He knows there’s too much negative out there on her and is willing to take the risk.
If he gets her, good for him. IF he doesn’t he will still get another radical in the wings and the opposition will have lost their fight for a second battle.
katy on May 26, 2009 at 9:37 AM
What have you read that makes you think she isn’t?
darwin on May 26, 2009 at 9:37 AM
rino: as soon as Souter announced his retirement, i started reading about this woman. i read from many different commentators that she is a lightweight. even though i graduated from law school, many appellate opinions appear lightweight to me, even when others say they are masterfully drawn.
so the average-brained of us may not be able to discern her lack of judicial intellect.
kelley in virginia on May 26, 2009 at 9:38 AM
She is absolutely the most controversial of the six “short list” candidates. The Harvard law dean (Elena Kagan) only got “warned” on because of her opposition to the Solomon Amendment (don’t ask, don’t tell), but that’s a minor issue. If the Republicans are smart, they’ll go to the mat on Sotomayor, and they’ll do so on the merits. She lacks the temperament to be a good Justice, liberal or otherwise.
As for the Republicans being intimidated by Hispanic groups, Supreme Court nominees and high-ranking Justice Department nominees just don’t count for much among minority groups. GWB had, at the time, the most diverse cabinet in history (Obama’s has more diversity) and got absolutely NO credit for it. Further, if you focus on her objective qualifications rather than her liberal views, you can avoid some of that pressure. After all, if she’s exposed as being too much of a lightweight for the job (ala Harriet Miers), most people — even Hispanics — aren’t likely to support her.
Outlander on May 26, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Total unforced error on Obama’s part. I was formerly a legal editor for Lexis Nexis and covered the Second Circuit and have read many of Judge Sotomayor’s opinions for the past 10 years. Her opinions are well written and well reasoned, but best of all she is not a liberal ideologue. I think that she is the Democrat’s Souter, the nominee that they assume shares their views, but in reality does not.
The beauty of Sotomayor is that now that Obama has named her, he would lose a ton of political capital, not to mention risk the PR/Latino vote that he so craves, if he has to withdraw her nomination. Comments taken out of context are not valid cricism when compared to the large volume of excellent work done by Judge Sotomayor.
Angry Dumbo on May 26, 2009 at 9:38 AM
bishop: just hearing her on tv makes me believe that she thinks only gangbangers should have guns because they are minorities.
kelley in virginia on May 26, 2009 at 9:39 AM
It’s like Deja Vu all over again.
- The Cat
MirCat on May 26, 2009 at 9:39 AM
“What are her qualifications?”
“She’s Hispanic.”
“Check.”
“She’s a woman.”
“Check.”
“She’s a liberal activist.”
“Check. She’s qualified.”
Daggett on May 26, 2009 at 9:40 AM
Well, if you accept -as I do- that replacing Souter HAS to be an upgrade, she can’t be all THAT bad..
And some lefty rags are whining she’s not a solid liberal replacement… so heck, we might get a 1% improvement….
The part that troubles me is that some on the left and the right says she’s just not that smart or that good… Forgetting ideology for a moment, even if someone votes against me 100% of the time, I’d like them to write good law. – I’m not sure so far she does.
Diogenes of Sinope on May 26, 2009 at 9:41 AM
angry dumbo: so you are saying that she’s qualified?
kelley in virginia on May 26, 2009 at 9:41 AM
George W Bush.
He appointed her.
Dave Rywall on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
She’s an intellectual lightweight, huh.
Which opinion of hers are you basing that on?
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 8:52 AM
Sotomayor: ‘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’…
artist on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Her academic accomplishments indicate that she has some brain power. I think she was dead wrong on the New Haven firefighters case which the Roberts Court will hear this term. Look for them to reverse her.
You are probably right that she won’t be the intellect that shapes the left-side of the court. My guess is that Obama has his 3 picks already set up. This one satisfied the diversity requirement, one of the next two will satisfy the legal architect requirement.
dedalus on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Replacing a liberal with another liberal is par for the course. If all Obama ever gets to replace are Breyer, Ginsburg and Stevens, then I can live with that. It’s if he ever has the opportunity to replace Kennedy or Alito that I’ll start pooping bricks.
yogi41 on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
As a rule, I don’t want racists on the supreme court.
Sonia Sotomayor
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15judge.html
strictnein on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
You left out that they have no guts, Ed. Lindsey Grahamnesty is gonna fold like cheap lawn furniture.
SouthernGent on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
As a senator, Obama admitted that both Roberts and Alito were qualified — then voted against both of them based on his disagreement with their philosophy (i.e. too conservative). Why should a different standard now apply to the Republican senators who’ll be voting on the nomination of the uber-liberal Sotomayor?
AZCoyote on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Unqualified, militant and socialist. NEXT, please. The GOP has to block any of Husseins extremist picks.
dogsoldier on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
against.
I read somethign where she is totally against anyone, especially females, are to not have weapons of any sort.
All I could say is WOW, and I haven’t been able to find that site since!
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:43 AM
What decisions of hers have you read that make you think she’s an intellectual lightweight?
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Proud Rino,
I thought you were in law school? you should know this stuff.
She’s not as much an intellectual lightweight as much as she is a radical social judicator/anti-constitutionalist.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/or_20090523_2724.php
katy on May 26, 2009 at 9:43 AM
There are those who say we should debate this nomination in the Senate, but I say immediate confirmation is necessary, if we are to avoid a financial meltdown, accompanied by crushing energy and health care crises. — BHO
petefrt on May 26, 2009 at 9:43 AM
So a racist.
Not suprised.
sonofdy on May 26, 2009 at 9:44 AM
I think the others on the Supreme are going to ring her neck.
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Bingo!!! The destruction of both the first and second amendments are high up the priority list for this administration, and Liberalism as a whole.
Keemo on May 26, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Proud Rino many of her former clerks says she’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer… read the tnr piece about her. (on drudge now)
Read my comments above, so far I’m inclined to think we could have done worse. (ideologically) But at this point I do have true reservations about her pure raw legal chops.
Diogenes of Sinope on May 26, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Most of the other justices she has served with have said it. They also say her positions are incoherent and rambling. One even said they have to tell her to shut up occasionally so they can hear the litigants argue.
conservnut on May 26, 2009 at 9:45 AM
I know! Why won’t people answer that very simple question?
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Opposing her will alienate hispanics.
Your only REAL concern is Roe, and that isn’t going anywhere.
It went nowhere under GW, he screwed you on that too.
Personally, I think you should change strategy.
In case you haven’t noticed, this one is a loozer.
strangelet on May 26, 2009 at 9:45 AM
I guess you haven’t been reading up on her.
What a concept there!
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Her being empathetic and all, I guess this means she’ll voluntarily recuse herself when the court hears a case involving white males.
Patrick S on May 26, 2009 at 9:47 AM
WTF? She sounds like a race baiter. So she professes to be more wise than a WHITE MALE because she is a Latina Woman? How about a BLACK MALE?, or a WHITE WOMAN? I am offended.
Geochelone on May 26, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Geochelone on May 26, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Well, I haven’t read enough one way or the other to be able to say she’s an intellectual lightweight. But you have. So what cases have you read which led you to that conclusion?
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 9:48 AM
I wonder if the leftist blogosphere will give me crap for not supporting a fellow Puerto Rican?
SCOOPTHIScarlos on May 26, 2009 at 9:48 AM
I see masochist troll has reared her ignorant, bigoted, and spiteful head for a thumping.
daesleeper on May 26, 2009 at 9:48 AM
Since Obama was going to name a liberal, picking Sotomayor is probably long-term the best thing for conservatives (and for The New Republic’s Jeff Rosen), since aggressiveness + judicial arrogance minus the intellectual arguments to back it up means she’s unlikely to be a justice who can build a consensus on a 5-4 decision (and to be fair, Scalia’s arrogance doesn’t help his case in winning over other Justices on the Court, even with the strength of some of his decisions. Which is why Roberts is a bigger problem for the left in terms of actual rulings as opposed to logical arguments, since he’s more likely to keep Anthony Kennedy from going over to the dark side).
jon1979 on May 26, 2009 at 9:49 AM
The incoherent cast votes.
maverick muse on May 26, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Hey, she’s not a lesbian!
Akzed on May 26, 2009 at 9:49 AM
“Comments taken out of context”…like the one she made about being a hispanic woman making her automatically wiser to sit on the bench than a white male? She’s a racist idiot…and like everything else Obama does is geared towards pandering to a certain voting block.
DCJeff on May 26, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Wrong Bush.
Abby Adams on May 26, 2009 at 9:49 AM
i expect a liberal, no surprise there. And will appointing one (even if her) have an impact on the voting? Will she vote more consistently liberal than Souter?
*shrug*
The ‘liberal’ part concerns me less (doesn’t thrill me mind you) than the ‘policy from the bench’ and racial/gender problems she seems to endorse/exude.
Midas on May 26, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Her name sounds a lot like that actress from Miami Vice, Saundra Santiago. What ever happened to her?
radjah shelduck on May 26, 2009 at 9:50 AM
It has been reported, and now confirmed, that the 4.7 tremor felt all over the U.S. was NOT and earthquake… it has now been learned that the founders and architects of the U.S. Constitution are spinning so wildly in their respective graves that the resonance of their spining is having a tectonic effect on the Northern Hemisphere.
HomeoftheBrave on May 26, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Opposing her will alienate hispanics.
Gaia knows we can’t do that, it might destroy the carefully constructed liberal philosophy of relative worth being nothing more than the sum of a person’s physical characteristics.
“Yeah yeah, Soto might not be qualified…but she’s Hispanic so just confirm her and move on.”
Bishop on May 26, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Speaking as a female.. I can tell you she is a feminazi that is worse then Hillary and should never have been taken for anything! The woman does not like guns, she looks down at people who use free speech as it was intended YET will quiet them up via a snarky remark. She also does not value human life.
Google her name, guns, and birth and see what happens. You might be shocked… or not.
Either way, this woman is more dangerous than Hillary going for supreme court!
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Bush appointed radical right wing extremists to the court Obama is doing the same. I hate politics. Why can’t we all find a middle ground?
money2 on May 26, 2009 at 9:51 AM
I could not give her a more glowing recommendation. She is not as bad as advertised. She was named to the bench by Bush 41 and if you read her opinions, she can only be fairly classified as a moderate. By a country mile, Judge Sotomayor is the best Republicans could have hoped for.
My statement about Sotomayor being the Democrats Souter is based on my belief that may side with the conservative justices more often than would make Democrats comfortable. In short this is a great pick that Republicans should vocally get behind before Obama’s more liberal backers weigh in. If liberal special interests oppose Judge Sotomayor and Republicans back her, we could have Harriet Miers, Part II. That would be a thing of beauty. : ))
Angry Dumbo on May 26, 2009 at 9:52 AM
1. I wonder how McCain will vote… (considering that he voted to confirm Breyer and Ginsburg, not to mention his liking of O’Connor.)
2. I’m proud to say that I voted on principle, which is to say, for neither Obama nor McCain.
3. Expect about as much effort out of the Republicans right now as the State Dep. with North Korea. Both situations require balls, and neither group has any.
Send_Me on May 26, 2009 at 9:52 AM
No one here has said that … that’s what’s coming from people who know her and are close to her. The right questions during her hearing will bring that to light if true. She’s also been tagged as arrogant and tempermental. Again, the right questions will show that.
What is obvious is her racism against whites.
darwin on May 26, 2009 at 9:52 AM
They aren’t rolling.. they are pounding to get out of their graves!
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:52 AM
here’s what the anti-sotomayer senators should do: find an appellate court judge out there who is hispanic & then when they have something negative to say about sotomayer, say “but judge so & so would be a great pick”. is that so tough?
kelley in virginia on May 26, 2009 at 9:53 AM
this is a political pick, Obama wants the GOP to take her down so he and the MSM can then smear the GOP as “anti-hispanic” and lock up the Hispanic vote for good, and thus all future elections if they vote the way the black vote goes
jp on May 26, 2009 at 9:53 AM
OK, well you said she was an intellectual lightweight, and I’m wondering what cases you read to make that determination, because I’d like to read them.
Proud Rino on May 26, 2009 at 9:53 AM
She is obviously not the sharpest knife in the drawer. She is more like a spork, but you know, you can almost cut yourself with a spork, so be careful. She believes court of appeals judges should make policy. I don’t know how she will mend her Ditzy image?
Geochelone on May 26, 2009 at 9:53 AM
It’ll be fun watching Scalia make mincemeat of her — especially if she’s as annoying during oral arguments and as personally unpleasant with the other justices as her Second Circuit reputation has it.
AZCoyote on May 26, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Opposing her is racist?
Who didn’t see that one coming?
Sick and tired of hearing folks say “No I’m not!”.
Waiting for the day when we have the balls to fight the fight instead of wringing our hands over what the neighbor’s think.
Limerick on May 26, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Her name sounds a lot like that actress from Miami Vice, Saundra Santiago. What ever happened to her?
radjah shelduck on May 26, 2009 at 9:50 AM
She’s working at a 7-11 with Philip Michael Thomas.
Bishop on May 26, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Clearly knows nothing of John G. Roberts.
Abby Adams on May 26, 2009 at 9:54 AM
Where did I say that and honestly anyone who hates guns… is ignorant. PERIOD!
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:54 AM
It could have been far worse, I’ll leave it at that.
Vashta.Nerada on May 26, 2009 at 9:54 AM
problem with voting for them, is the Left then uses that as a talking point to claim that Ginsburg, Breyer, etc. aren’t that ‘far left’ if the GOP voted for them? however, Roberts and Alito are extreme Right since the Dems voted against them.
jp on May 26, 2009 at 9:54 AM
More on the radical rulings of Sotomayor…
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/print_friendly.php?ID=or_20081213_3739
katy on May 26, 2009 at 9:54 AM
Yeah, the Dems’ abuse of Alberto Gonzales sure hurt them at the polls in November.
Akzed on May 26, 2009 at 9:54 AM
angry dumbo: why would the libs not like her?
kelley in virginia on May 26, 2009 at 9:54 AM
Wouldn’t it be AWESOME to be in a room when Scalia opens in on her! LOL
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:55 AM
It seem TOTUS broke this story at 6:21 am
http://baracksteleprompter.blogspot.com/2009/05/here-comes-sonny.html
aebloo on May 26, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Granholm?
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:56 AM
I’m still waiting to find out what being a lesbian has to do with MS13 and the Geneva Convention. Anyone?
Geochelone on May 26, 2009 at 9:56 AM
I look forward to the day when “[Insert name] is the first [insert physical trait] to [insert activity]” is no longer part of our public discourse.
[Lucy] is the first [Half Irish, Half East Asian Islander] to [eat a picnic on Friday]. It’s historic!
Lehosh on May 26, 2009 at 9:56 AM
The Latino woman / white male quote has surfaced!
SCOOPTHIScarlos on May 26, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Wake up, folks. TNR is a liberal mag. If they hate Judge Sotomayor it is because she is not liberal enough, not that she is too liberal.
Angry Dumbo on May 26, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Wow, some of you all need to chill. I’m ideologically somewhat to right of Rush Limbaugh and a tad to the left of Attila the Hun…. But DAMYN PEOPLE calm down.
Nothing we have SO FAR warrants this reply.
That quote -in context- doesn’t make her a racist.
Calm down and wait for the real dirt to come out.
Diogenes of Sinope on May 26, 2009 at 9:57 AM
She won’t listen unless the male has his genitalia removed. She won’t listen unless the person acknowledges her racial or cultural superiority.
WWRBGD? Channel Ruth Bader Ginsberg. A wise Latina woman with the richness of experiences would never make such a presumptive qualifying statement. Sotomayer represents bigotry. Ginsberg won’t be around long enough to teach/train Sotomayer.
maverick muse on May 26, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Thank you enlightened, idiot voters . . . you really stuck it to us this time.
rplat on May 26, 2009 at 9:57 AM
The rules are different for you.
Historically conservatives have been racist and anti-immigration.
You have a steeper hill to climb to win hispanic votes.
strangelet on May 26, 2009 at 9:58 AM
Bush appointed radical right wing extremists to the court Obama is doing the same. I hate politics. Why can’t we all find a middle ground?
money2 on May 26, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Why aren’t you posting under your other screen name of “nice343″?
Planning on coming back later as ‘nice’ and agreeing with youself?
Bishop on May 26, 2009 at 9:58 AM
John Roberts is not a “radical right wing extremist” by any stretch of the imagination.
AZCoyote on May 26, 2009 at 9:58 AM
Yeah, maybe one of the (R) Senators could give their time to him. And another for Thomas.
- The Cat
MirCat on May 26, 2009 at 9:58 AM
I can tell you are still in Highschool. Pretty sad when they stop teaching history.
upinak on May 26, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »