Sotomayor

Rather than posting something new every second on the news and commentary on Obama's nomination of Sotomayor, I will give you everything interesting I have found thus far and leave the issue for (hopefully) a long while.

My initial reaction is that she is the perfect choice of a man who believes his power and ability, and the nature of the law, to be unconstrained. An "empathetic" jurist is, ultimately, an unempathetic one. Because this country is held together in delicate balance by its restrictive system of law, when that law is bent or broken by a single individual, the balance is shifted. While Sotomayor will work well for individuals, she will unduly work against the society.

Anyway...

Charles Krauthammer:

Well, as we heard today, she has a great American story.

And — but there is someone else here, as we just heard, who also has a great American story, and that is Frank Ricci, who is the fireman who sued because he took a promotional test, he and others, and was denied the promotion simply because of his race.

And that's a case that came to the second circuit court, and Judge Sotomayor summarily dismissed it.

Now, that is important because it tells us a lot about her judicial philosophy. And the fact that, as we heard Judge Jose Contrera, on her court, also a Clinton appointee, was upset by her dismissal of this, and not even being willing to recognize the serious constitutional issues, that tells us that she really is a believer in the racial spoils system.

She is a person who said in a speech that she would hope that a wise Latina woman would come to better conclusions as a judge than a white male.

I mean, imagine if you heard someone say the reverse. He would be run out of town as a racist and a sexist.

And it reflects the president's idea of empathy in the judicial choice, meaning a person who cares about the standing of a defendant or a plaintiff in a case, meaning if he is rich or poor, black or white, advantaged or not, which should not be something a judge takes into consideration.

A person ought to take into consideration their personal life and philanthropy, someone in Congress ought to take into considerations in judging if taxes ought to be high or low depending on your station in life, but never a judge. Station in life is not a consideration. It is what the law is.

She is a believer in that, and I think that that's a distortion of the law, and it ought to be a reason to oppose her.

George Will.

She is NOT Hispanic.

WSJ: The Empathy Nominee.

Questions she should be asked.

Focus on the Family.

So, NYT, what is important is not following the law but making sure the little guy wins?

In her rulings, Judge Sotomayor has repeatedly displayed the empathy Mr. Obama has said he is looking for in a justice. She has listened attentively to, and often ruled in favor of, people who have been discriminated against, defendants and other groups that are increasingly getting short shrift in the federal courts. She has shown little patience for the sort of procedural bars that conservative judges have been using to close the courthouse door on people whose rights have been violated.

Exit question: Is it a good thing or bad thing that her judicial opinions will not "last"?