The Washington Post profile of Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Souter, sounds really good to me.
At Yale, her classmates recall a young woman with a brilliant legal mind who was tough when arguing for her views. And although they said she never forgot her modest background, and always identified with the disadvantaged, her main passion was for the law, not a particular political agenda. …
… In 1984, George Pavia, a New York lawyer representing Fiat and other Italian business clients, said he was looking for a young lawyer with courtroom experience to help with products liability cases. He said he found Sotomayor “just ideal for us in terms of her background and training.”
“She is liberal, as am I,” Pavia said. “Liberal without being a flaming type of do-gooder or anything of the sort. To call her a centrist would not be accurate. To call her wild-eyed would also not be accurate. She is far too rational, far too interested in the underlying facts.”
Sotomayor grew up in a Puerto Rican neighborhood in the Bronx and was educated at Princeton and Yale Law School. People quoted in the profile praise her for being even-handed and non-ideological in her judgments.
In an article published before the announcement, Peter Baker of the New York Times announced that “the Left” already was unhappy with President Obama’s short list of potential nominees, which included Sotomayor, because we lefties would only be content with a “full-throated, unapologetic liberal torchbearer to counter conservatives like Justice Scalia.”
“It’s quite likely the left is not going to get what it wants,†said Thomas C. Goldstein, co-head of the Supreme Court practice at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and founder of Scotusblog, a well-read Web site. …
… “Unless Obama restrains his compulsion toward centrist consensus and appoints real progressives to replace not only Souter but Ginsburg and Stevens, our right-wing court may get even more conservative,†Jeff Cohen, founding director of the Park Center for Independent Media at Ithaca College, wrote on a Web site for progressive commentary, OpEdNews.com.
Personally, I think most of “the Left” will be fine with Justice Nominee Sotomayor. We’ll see.
Update: CNN has published Sotomayor’s resume and her record on notable cases. Scroll down for the record. From what I see she tends to side with the individual against government and corporate interests. Righties are going to have a fit. I like this lady.
Update: Scott Lemieux ‘s take on Sotomayor —
It’s a good, solid pick. Not a home run like Karlan would have been, but I also don’t think she’ll be another Breyer; I see another Ginsburg at worst. For me, she would have been #2 among the viable candidates after Wood, and I don’t think Wood is clearly more liberal; they’re within a range in which appellate court records don’t reveal enough information to make firm judgments.
“full-throated, unapologetic liberal torchbearer to counter conservatives like Justice Scalia”
Uh, no, Mr. Peter Baker. I want an exceptionally smart and accomplished legal mind to counter reactionary, small-minded nitwits like Justice Scalia.
As long as legal metaphysical occultism, séancing original intent by Ouija (as is done at Heritage Institute), or clairvoyant melding with original minds are not involved, there should not be a great problem. Methinks we’ve a winner in the Judge select. Any Republican or Blue-Dog Democrat who attempts obstructing the process needs be given political castration at the next election.
Nothing to add to gnarlytrombone and expat’s comments except, “Hear, hear,” “Amen,” or “So say we all,” according to one’s preference.
I agree! 🙂
David Souter wasn’t an especially liberal justice, he was and is moderate and so is Sonia Sotomayor by accounts. This won’t make a big difference to the ideological balance of the court, but it will be nice to have someone with a different perspective given her background.
Frankly I think it is best that Barack Obama is keeping his powder dry on making big changes in the court makeup. There will be more appointments before his term is out.
She sounds great, but I expect this will bring out the worst in the right, in their attempt to smear her.
moonbat, the right’s already been pre-smearing rumored candidates, including Sotomayor. Obama could have nominated St. Jerome and the right would have smeared him.
In a way, it’s liberating. Since they always give the same response (“No! NOOOO!”), Obama is pretty much free to nominate who he wants, as long as he can get the nominee past the capricious members of his own party… Getting the Dems in line is the only place where we’ll see anything unpredictable in the confirmation hearings.
A self made competent intellectual with humble roots. An anti-Palin, even. I give rabid wingnuts a week to poo fling ‘illegal alien socialist pro-islamic feminazi’ on her. Which of course, means she’s good as in.
“At Yale, her classmates recall a young woman with a brilliant legal mind who was tough when arguing for her views”
Well that’s it, right out of the box she is a liberal activist. Why would a judge need a brilliant legal mind, all she needs to do is interpret the constitution. “Tough when arguing for her views” well there you go gain, she shouldn’t consider her views, just interpret the constitution, you know just like they did in Bu$hco vs. Gore. Only strict constructionist need apply!
I would think this the predictable response from the easy to read these days wing-nuts!
She will be abig plus if she is a very competent advocate for her positions. My understanding is that Souter did not play that game very well. She might be able to win over Kennedy more than Souter.