When a judge is nominated for the Supreme Court, the nitpicking invariably begins.
For Sonia Sotomayor, however, the nitpicking seems a little more personal than political.
Democrats, and Sotomayor herself, are relying too much on the whole "It/s the American Dream" strategy (see Obama, Barack for reference as to how this rhetorical scheme generates empathy and awe), and the main criticisms of the Republicans who oppose her are based on previous public statements about being a "wise Latina" that suggest, to them, that she would act with "inappropriate empathy" to groups that she is partial to or is affiliated with.
The job of a Supreme Court justice is to apply the law, not to make it. So, to say that Sotomayor is unfit for the bench because she has given preferential treatment to either hispanics or to Democrats would be a fair criticism. However, the Editorial Board cannot find any evidence that Sotomayor has any agenda that can be classified under a masthead reading "Democrat" or "Republican," or that she/s shown blatant "sympathy" to minority groups because of her race.
When Sotomayor was on the 2nd District Court of Appeals, she ruled against the plaintiffs in Ricci v. DeStefano, a case about reverse discrimination. Sotomayor said that New Haven/s fire department did not have the right to base promotions on a written test, because written tests disproportionately favor Caucasians. Those who oppose her nomination say that Sotomayor was wrong to not add her own legal analysis to the case (and want to point to the fact that she, oh my God, protected minorities in the workplace). However, this was not a â€ógimme/ to the African-Americans who failed the test, or a cop out on her part, but rather an indication that she firmly believes in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In Pappas v. Giuliani she dissented from the majority and protected employee/s rights to send racist e-mails without fear of termination because the First Amendment protects offensive and hateful speech. It doesn/t sound to us like Sotomayor is coddling minorities and eschewing her responsibility to uphold the Constitution. It sounds like race is secondary in her decision making.
Sotomayor may be proud of her Latina heritage and vocal about her status as a minority, but her rulings in those cases show that her affiliation as a minority does not taint her rulings from the bench. That should be the only concern of naysayers. Period.
Perhaps Democrats would be better off reminding people how she has shown no preference to minorities in past rulings so as to leave Republicans with little to no other ammo. Instead, expect more nitpicking about the implications of her race to flood the Senate Judiciary Committee as hearings proceed. It would be nice to think that race doesn/t enter the equation, but we definitely remember how Bush deliberated about appointing Clarence Thomas after only a few months on the federal bench so as not to use him as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall and be accused of tokenism.
On the other hand, if "being Latina" is the biggest dirt Republicans can dig up on the Princeton and Yale grad, it looks like Sotomayor will get the appointment (given that she doesn/t, like, become roommates with Jane Roe in the next few days).
