Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveZ
Judge Sotomayor has spoken with brutal candor regarding what happens within a Court of Appeals action. It has been an unwritten rule that this fact of business not be recognized out loud, but it is how it is. She's no political dynasty blue-blood, and in that sense it is refreshing to see someone who does not come "from money" as a nominee. Being "street-wise" should not be a detriment.
As far as having decisions reversed, that happens. I know of several judges whose careers are speckled (some more brightly than others) with appellate reversals, and they are all honorable jurists who can be viewed as "conservative."
If this nomination is contested along party lines, that would be tragic. The question should be whether Judge Sotomayor is a jurist with the education and experience to handle cases within the SCOTUS jurisdiction.
The American Bar Association will be preparing its evaluation of her credentials, and that won't be party-biased. I'm looking forward to the ABA evaluation as it will be factual and blunt.
|
Legislating from the bench is a violation of the constitution. Doesn't that bother you?
The numbers that I think I heard was 60% reversal. I think that's an indicator of a major judicial problem.
Judge Sotomayor, without a doubt has the education required. She has experience but I am not sure if she has the temperament. Justice is, as it should be, blind to race, color, creed, social standing and position. Judge Sotomayor is not. Therein lies my problem with her.
As for the ABA not being bias, I will leave that one alone.
Yoda
A member of the loyal opposition