At 10:15am EDT President Obama will name his selection for Supreme Court Justice to replace outgoing Justice Souter. Apparently, it will be Sonia Sotomayor:
WASHINGTON — President Obama has decided to nominate the federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, choosing a daughter of Puerto Rican parents raised in Bronx public housing projects to become the nation’s first Hispanic justice, officials said Tuesday.
The decision, to be announced Tuesday morning, will be Mr. Obama’s first selection to the Supreme Court and could trigger a struggle with Senate Republicans who have indicated they may oppose the nomination. But Democrats control nearly the 60 votes necessary to choke off a filibuster and even Republicans said they have little hope of blocking confirmation barring unforeseen revelation.
Ms. Sotomayor follows the profile of previous recent Supreme Court appointees: she’s a graduate of Yale Law and a federal appellate judge. I have little doubt that she’ll be confirmed.
One of the things that’s occasionally mentioned is that she’s a member of the National Council of La Raza. I’ll admit that the name rankles me but other than that I know very little about the organization. Is it a legitimate issue? Is it the NAACP or is it the Black Panthers? The Italian Anti-Defamation League or the Sicilian Mafia?
I’m asking this because I genuinely want to know and welcome reasonable arguments pro or con. Please note: ad hominems directed at me will be summarily deleted.
My experience with La Raza when I was in Texas is that there are three kinds of people in the group: a large contingent looking for racial/ethnic identity and largely concerned with day to day issues of (at least perceived) prejudice, such as housing discrimination and poor job prospects, who basically see the organization as the NAACP (as originally envisioned) for Latinos; a similarly large contingent whose focus is on ensuring that illegal immigrants are not punished, and that illegal immigration can continue unchecked, and who largely see this as a matter of social justice; and a very small radical contingent.
The very small radical contingent believes that the southwestern US should revert to Mexico, that the US (which they identify one-for-one with Caucasians, for whom they have words less nice and less neutral) is inherently evil and incapable of reformation, and in many cases that only violence will be able to put things to their conception of rightness and justice. This small radical group, both racist and anti-US, is also the leadership of the La Raza, particularly at the national level.
I have no way of knowing which part of this Sotomayor finds attractive, and to what degree she finds each attractive. I suspect that she falls into the first (“social justice”) group, but do not know her well enough to be sure.
Sotomayor claims that civil service exams cannot be used if minorities fail them at a higher rate. In other words, she is a social justice race crusader of the worst variety — the “denial of reality” kind.
Affirmative action just got a steroid boost.
That’s my guess, too, Jeff, although I have no way of knowing. I don’t find the notion of using the courts in this way appealing, although I know many, apparently including the president, do. I don’t think it’s the job of the courts to do justice but, rather, to assist in enforcing the law by interpreting it.
I believe that doing justice is the role of the legislature but it’s enormously easier for the legislature to delegate all of their duties to the executive and judicial branches, blow their mouths off, and collect their salaries and eventually their pensions.
It’s almost enough to make me run for the legislature. Except that I have morals, and care about public policy, and am probably not electable by either party, and my wife would leave me rather than be a political wife. But a well-paying (especially the off-the-books pay, which is where the morals come in) do-nothing job where I get to spout off all the time and be fawned over by people sounds appealing, certainly.