Oregon writer, Rain Trueax, and Oregon painter, Diane Widler Wenzel co-author Rainy Day Thought. Diane generally posts on Wednesdays and Rain on Saturdays. There may be extra days or changes as situations warrant. Comments are always welcome and appreciated as it turns an article into a discussion.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

It only matters when a woman says it?

In my blog on Cheney, I ended up commenting on Obama's choice for a Supreme Court Justice to replace David Souter. I am pleased with it but will be interested in learning more about her opinions on some important issues that will be before the court.

Recent appointments like Alito and Roberts, despite them assuring us they were not extreme righties, have proven to be no real surprise to the right or the left. They did what Bush hoped. We have four very conservative judges with one conservative who can be a surprise. Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas have not surprised yet. Kennedy, you never know for sure.

Sotomayor's intellect, her ideas may be healthy for the court. Possibly when they are debating issues, she may put out some thoughts the conservative, neo-con, federalist judges have not considered. She is young, vigorous, has opinions and Scalia might enjoy having her there.

Souter surprised the first President Bush and maybe Obama will be surprised by Sonia Sotomayor. There have been some questions liberals have had about her opinion on abortion rights. She voted with the pro-life side in the two cases where there is a record. Obama has said he did not ask her opinion on abortion because he was looking for other qualities as of primary importance.

The right has viciously attacked her with Newt Gingrich leading the charge in public and probably Rush Limbaugh on his radio program. They would have attacked any liberal pick, but they especially didn't want this one. Rush Limbaugh expressed his fear of her in 1997.

Along with Obama, I like her intellect and background. How can one not admire people who pull themselves up from backgrounds where it's rare?. I do think never having married or had children, being raised in a fatherless home does give her some areas she has no experience on which to draw. Souter had never married either though. He ended up a far more independent thinker than the first Bush had anticipated and Sotomayor might do the same-- to both sides. From what I have read she is very much oriented to the law but law has to be interpreted based on human beings.

As I learn more about her, I may write more but for now I am pleased with the choice. The following article is a good take on the hypocrisy of the right which is nothing new. How apropos that one of the most hypocritical, Newt Gingrich, is aiming for another presidential run. He should do well as hypocrisy has been a byword for the right wing-- think Rush Limbaugh as another prime example. It governs their lives and decisions. Talk one way. Live another.

Anyway in regards their complaints about what Sotomayor has said in various interviews, this is well worth reading:


Ingineer66 said...

Rain I hope she is a good pick if she actually gets seated. I think her Hispanic background may give her a more pro life leaning than most democrats would like. After all it was the Hispanic vote in California that doomed gay marriage. I have nothing against her background as far as having her on the supreme court. I think it is great every time someone pulls themselves up from a difficult upbringing to become successful. I did it and so can anyone else.

But it concerns me that she is from the new breed of judges that thinks they need to legislate from the bench. I do not like her rulings on racial discrimination. And her rulings have been overruled 60% of the time by the Supreme court.

Rain said...

Well as you saw in that article, the other justices have said the same thing she did. What kind of judge she will make is one of those iffy things. We have had some bad ones and maybe do right now. I think their terms should be limited as lifetime appointment seem to me to keep them out of step with the country and give them no accountability. They are always a crapshoot, I think. They get in and who knows what they will do. It's frustrating.

I think the issue of the fire department was one about the law. Did they have the right to do what they did? It wasn't just about affirmative action but how you saw the power of the fire department to run their affairs.

Time will tell on her and we will hear a lot more about her opinions. Judges do make laws by interpreting them or denying them based on how they see the constitution and the current right wing ones are no exception.

Darlene said...

I have always been irritated by the right's rant on "legislating from the bench". Legislation always comes from the bench. Does anyone seriously believe that their attitudes don't affect their decisions? Everyone of them bring their own background and ideas with them and they don't park their minds at the door.

Rain said...

This is an interesting article on how Sotomayor operates and what we might expect from her: Slate about the case she might prefer the liberals not notice.

Republicans are so eager to find anything to pin on Obama that they pay little attention to the facts of anything and the way they have gone after this lady makes them look like something I heard this week about Cheney-- they are the trolls that live under the bridge. Think about it and see how apropos that analogy really is :)

Ingineer66 said...

I do not think any judge will make everyone happy. There must have been a good reason for her to decide the way she did. Kind of funny the Republicans side with the common man and the Dem decided with the police. I guess she just being the Man keeping the little guy down.

Rain said...

well she apparently believed in giving the benefit of doubt to the law officer which is something that democrats are usually accused of not doing. As for Republicans supporting the common man, I guess you don't mean that generically *s*