The Hollywood Liberal

Right-Wing Ad Repeats Debunked Sotomayor Race Claim
In a newly released ad, the right-wing Judicial Confirmation Network repeats the debunked claim that Judge Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court places “equal justice…under attack”: The ad quotes from a lengthy speech where Judge Sotomayor warned that “[p]ersonal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see” and expressed her “hope that a wise Latina […]

In a newly released ad, the right-wing Judicial Confirmation Network repeats the debunked claim that Judge Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court places “equal justice…under attack”:

The ad quotes from a lengthy speech where Judge Sotomayor warned that “[p]ersonal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see” and expressed her “hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” The ad cites the quotes as evidence that Sotomayor would not treat everyone who appears before her equally.

Judge Sotomayor conceded today that her now-famous “wise Latina woman” quote was a poor word choice, but it is clear from context that Sotomayor’s speech says the opposite of what the ad claims. Indeed, Sotomayor says in no uncertain terms that judges must ensure that their decisions are never compromised by prejudice:

I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.

Moreoever, Judge Sotomayor’s statements that her own experiences as a Latina impact how she views her role as a judge mirror similar statements by conservative Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who said that “[w]hen I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account.”

The racial attacks on Judge Sotomayor have no basis in reality. Perhaps that explains why even conservative elected officials continue to distance themselves from the right-wing special interest groups’ race-driven smear campaign.

Sessions ?uneasy? with Gingrich?s ?rhetoric? against Sotomayor.
On Wednesday, Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich drew attention to himself when he tweeted that Judge Sonia Sotomayor should “withdraw” her nomination for the Supreme Court because she’s a “Latina woman racist.” Since then, some Senate Republicans have sought to distance themselves from Gingrich. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said he disagreed while Sen. […]

On Wednesday, Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich drew attention to himself when he tweeted that Judge Sonia Sotomayor should “withdraw” her nomination for the Supreme Court because she’s a “Latina woman racist.” Since then, some Senate Republicans have sought to distance themselves from Gingrich. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said he disagreed while Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) called it “terrible.” Now, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has told the Washington Post that he is “uneasy” with the rhetoric:

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said today he was “uneasy” over allegations by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and talk-show host Rush Limbaugh that Sotomayor is racist. Sessions, who lost a 1986 bid for a federal judgeship amid concerns over his own racial sensitivity, said Republicans should focus on Sotomayor’s legal record to try to divine what sort of a Supreme Court justice she would make.

“I’m uneasy,” Sessions said in a 30-minute interview in his office in the Russell Senate Office Building. “I don’t think that’s good rhetoric. The question is, has the judge gone too far or not, given the established law of the land?”

Read more on right-wing hate in today’s Progress Report.

Obama Says Judge Regrets Wording
President Obama said yesterday that Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor regrets her choice of words in a 2001 speech in which she said a “wise Latina” judge would often make better decisions than a white male.

Obama Says He Will Name National Cybersecurity Adviser
President Obama used a White House speech yesterday to try to raise national concern about threats to computer networks, drawing praise from some industry executives and lawmakers but criticism from others who said his initiatives do not go far enough.

Arizona Sheriff Arpaio Says Politics Are Behind Federal Probes of His Office
The lawyers representing a controversial Arizona sheriff who is under investigation for his treatment of Latino residents accused officials in the Justice and Homeland Security departments yesterday of political motivations in pursuing probes against their client.

President Obama Delivers Remarks on Cyber Security Strategy
SPEAKER: PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA [*] OBAMA: Hello, everybody. Please be seated. We meet today at a transformational moment, a moment in history when our interconnected world presents us at once with great promise but also great peril. Now, over the past four months, my administration has taken d…

Obama and His Pro-Life Apologists
Robert George, Witherspoon Institute

Israel and the Axis of Evil
Caroline Glick, Jerusalem Post

Obama, Incorporated
Rich Lowry, New York Post

What Will Obama Say in Cairo?

Next week President Barack Obama travels to Cairo to deliver what is expected to be a major statement on relations between the United States and the Islamic world, but informed skeptics predict his new approach to the region will resemble the late months of the Bush administration.

READ THE WHOLE ITEM

Related Entries

• May 29, 2009 Breadline USA
• May 29, 2009 Mark Dowie on I.F. Stone
• May 28, 2009 Fessing Up Has Lost Its Shock Value
• May 26, 2009 Stuff the Bankers, Starve the Kids
• May 26, 2009 Uncle Sam to Own GM Without Any of the Perks

Mark Dowie on I.F. Stone

Critic and crusader, the late I.F. Stone was an American original. Neither changing times nor his failing eyesight blunted his radical edge or dimmed his acerbic wit. A new biography by D.D. Guttenplan gives us the man behind the legendary muckraker.

READ THE WHOLE ITEM

Related Entries

• May 29, 2009 Breadline USA
• May 29, 2009 Mark Dowie on I.F. Stone
• May 28, 2009 Fessing Up Has Lost Its Shock Value
• May 26, 2009 Stuff the Bankers, Starve the Kids
• May 26, 2009 Uncle Sam to Own GM Without Any of the Perks

Glenn Beck And Craig T. Nelson Talk About Not Paying Taxes Ever Again, For Some Reason
Via the Cajun Boy comes this epic clip of Glenn Beck and Craig T. Nelson. Nelson has a big ol’ sad, because no one takes…

Robert Slayton: Republicans, Immigrants and Sotomayor
A number of mainstream publications, including the New York Times, are reporting on the problems the Sotomayor nomination poses for the Republican Party. If the…

Green Day Gives Stephen Colbert The Keyboard Cat Treatment
Fans of Stephen Colbert have long celebrated the calamitous pre-show fall that led to Colbert breaking his wrist and the WristStrong movement which followed in…

Abortion Rights Backers Reassured On Sotomayor
The White House scrambled yesterday to assuage worries from liberal groups about Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s scant record on abortion rights, delivering strong but vague assurances…

Pentagon Plans New Military Command To Wage War In Cyberspace
WASHINGTON ?” The Pentagon plans to create a new military command for cyberspace, administration officials said Thursday, stepping up preparations by the armed forces to…

Wash. Times claims “extraordinary rebuke” for Sotomayor if Ricci is reversed

In a May 27 editorial, The Washington Times wrote of the 2nd Circuit decision joined by Judge Sonia Sotomayor in the New Haven firefighters case: “The Supreme Court is expected to rule on Ricci v. DeStefano before the Senate votes on Judge Sotomayor’s nomination. It would be an extraordinary rebuke were a current nominee to be overruled on such a controversial case by the very justices she is slated to join.” But whether or not a majority of the court votes to reverse Ricci, at least one justice, David Souter — whom Sotomayor would replace — made comments in oral argument that were supportive of the position taken by the 2nd Circuit in the case. Moreover, it is not unprecedented for a Supreme Court nominee to have been rebuked for an appellate court opinion. Indeed, Justice Samuel Alito received a “rebuke” as an appeals court judge, by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, whom he replaced. Nor would it be unprecedented for a justice to have a ruling he or she reached as an appellate court judge subsequently reversed.

As Media Matters for America has noted, during the Supreme Court’s April 22 oral argument in the case, Souter asked the counsel for the firefighters, “Why isn’t the most reasonable reading of this set of facts a reading which is consistent with giving the city an opportunity, assuming good faith, to start again? … [I]sn’t that the only way to avoid the damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation?”

In his book The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court (Doubleday, 2007), New Yorker staff writer and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin wrote that in 1992, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor had “excoriated” the “logic, approach, and conclusions” of her eventual successor, then-3rd Circuit Court of Appeals judge Alito, in her opinion for the abortion-rights case Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

In his 3rd Circuit opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, Alito had argued that Pennsylvania’s spousal notification law was constitutional “because it is ‘rationally related’ to a ‘legitimate’ state interest” and does not pose an “undue burden.” Joining Justices Anthony Kennedy and Souter in a plural opinion, O’Connor affirmed the 3rd Circuit’s finding that the spousal notification law was unconstitutional, finding the statute “repugnant to our present understanding of marriage and of the nature of the rights secured by the Constitution. Women do not lose their constitutionally protected liberty when they marry. The Constitution protects all individuals, male or female, married or unmarried, from the abuse of governmental power, even where that power is employed for the supposed benefit of a member of the individual’s family.”

Moreover, it also would not be unprecedented for the court to reverse a ruling reached by a justice before their elevation to the Supreme Court. Then-appeals court judge John Roberts was a member of a three-judge panel of the District of Columbia Circuit Court, which, in its July 2005 unanimous ruling on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, overruled a district court’s holding that Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemini national, “could not be tried by a military commission unless a competent tribunal determined that he was not a prisoner of war under the 1949 Geneva Convention governing the treatment of prisoner.” The panel found that “the 1949 Geneva Convention does not confer upon Hamdan a right to enforce its provisions in court” and that “the 1949 Convention does not apply to al Qaeda and its members.”

Roberts was elevated to chief justice of the United States several months later, in September 2005. Then, in 2006, the Supreme Court reversed the circuit court’s decision on a 5-3 ruling. In reversing the ruling, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in the majority opinion that the circuit court’s ruling with regard to whether Hamdan had a right to enforce the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions was based upon a footnote which “does not control this case” and stated that the panel’s “reasoning” with regard to whether members of the Conventions applied to members of Al Qaeda was “erroneous.” The court further found that “the military commission convened to try Hamdan lacks power to proceed because its structure and procedures violate both the UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] and the Geneva Conventions.” Roberts recused himself from participation in the Supreme Court’s ruling.

From the Times editorial:

Judge Sotomayor seems to favor racial discrimination. Consider the case of Ricci v. DeStefano. In that controversial case, 19 white firemen were denied promotion because no blacks scored high enough on a race-neutral test to also be promoted. Judge Sotomayor ruled against the white firefighters.

If Mr. Obama wanted a judge with the right “empathy,” he struck out with Judge Sotomayor. One of the white firefighters denied promotion, Frank Ricci, is dyslexic. In order to ace the promotion exam, he quit a second job, spent $1,000 for instruction materials, and spent many hours reading those books into an audio tape to help him study. For his extraordinary efforts, he finished sixth out of 77 applicants for promotion — but then was denied, simply because he is white.

Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jose Cabranes, appointed by a Democratic president, complained that the ruling written by Judge Sotomayor and two other judges “contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case.”

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on Ricci v. DeStefano before the Senate votes on Judge Sotomayor’s nomination. It would be an extraordinary rebuke were a current nominee to be overruled on such a controversial case by the very justices she is slated to join.

Judge Sotomayor seems to be the most radical person ever nominated for the high court. To continue to command public respect, the Senate will have to ask her some hard questions. The simplest one to ask will be the hardest one for her to answer: Given her statements against whites and males, can she be fair to all Americans?

Source: CIA Dissembles In Briefings
Yet more evidence that the CIA may not have been totally up front with Nancy Pelosi during that contested torture briefing from 2002… A former “deep-cover” CIA operative tells CQ’s Jeff Stein that agency briefers often hide facts or shade…

Feds: Kerik Lied To White House
Looks like Bernie Kerik’s legal woes aren’t going away any time soon. The former NYC police commissioner and Giuliani crony has been indicted in Washington DC on charges of lying to the Bush White House officials who were vetting him…

The Tattlesnake – Suggestions for the Fox Populi and the Other Media Maroons Edition
Remember, Kids, Freedom Isn’t Free: While I would never support censoring anyone’s freedom of speech, I think there should be special conditions for those in the right-wing media who regularly abuse this right by using it to spread outrageous fabrications and misleading distortions. Following are a few suggestions: – Sean Hannity should be required to do […]