Judging Sotomayor?

[unixronin]

Much has been written, on both sides, about the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court. President Obama has repeatedly said that he feels the Supreme Court needs her “empathy”. Sotomayor herself has said on many occasions that “a wise Latina woman [...] would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male” when it comes to judging the law.

I have grave reservations about this nomination, and a few minutes ago, I realized how to distil out the central essence of why.

You see, the United States is a Constitutional republic, a nation of law, and the duty of the United States Supreme Court is to be the final judge and arbiter of the nations laws and their rectitude. It is the duty of the Supreme Court’s Justices to make their judgements as fairly, as correctly, and as objectively as they possibly can. Their responsibility is not to judge the ethnic sensitivity of the plaintiff or the hardships faced by the defendant; it is to judge the fairness, the correctness, and the Constitutional soundness of the applicable law itself. If the Supreme Court cannot be objective, it cannot properly discharge its duties and responsibilities.

Yet, our President is nominating to the United States Supreme Court a woman whose strongest and most vital qualification for the position — or so he tells us — is precisely that she is not objective.

Does anyone else see a problem with this?

Comments

[cipherpunk.livejournal.com]

No, it’s actually not.

Imagine Gerald Haney were to be one of the Nisei in the 442nd, a group of Japanese–Americans who fought with great distinction in Europe during World War Two. She would still be devaluing his experiences.

Her word was “Latina.” Her belief that her viewpoint is as much a part of gender politics as racial politics, and also as much as economics, since by her speeches it appears she considers growing up poor to be an inseparable part of her Latina experience.

If it’s racism, then it’s also sexism. Given this, I think it’s more apt to say she’s playing “identity politics” (all of the things that make me me, make me uniquely qualified/privileged over others) rather than to use the less accurate terms of racism and/or sexism and/or classism.

[fruitylips.livejournal.com]

I stand corrected.

"Second, I would 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."

You are right. It is racist and sexist, pure and simple.

Sorry for the omission.