Sonia Sotomayor, President Barak Obama’s nominee for the United States Supreme Court, ought not to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Although her liberal record as an appellate judge is not relatively extreme, her troubling views suggest that once she is given a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land without the fear of reversal she currently should have, she will feel free to judge based upon her extremist views, despite her promises to the Senators during her confirmation hearings. Note: Sotomayor has been reversed by the Supreme Court relatively frequently.
Sotomayor’s repeated statement that a “wise Latina” would make a better judge than a non-Hispanic male suggests her bigotry, and reflects Obama’s view that empathy should prevail over impartial justice. In other words, cases will be prejudged based upon who the parties are instead of the law or the facts. Sotomayor does not even understand that the role of an appellate judge is to rule on matters of law after accepting the finding of fact by the court of original jurisdiction. In her written judicial opinions, she oddly takes it upon herself to retry the facts in certain cases without seeing the testimony of the witnesses.
However, Sotomayor’s statement that the courts are places of policy making is even more troubling. The courts are places where the law is interpreted, not made. Laws are made by legislators, not judges. Sotomayor’s embrace of such judicial activism instead of judicial restraint reflects her liberal contempt for the Constitution that she will be sworn to follow and interpret. Her arbitrary favoritism of certain parties, combined with her belief in judicial activism, would make the law subject to her whim, instead of being the product of the legislative process. With Sotomayor on the Supreme Court, Obama would continue the liberal strategy of “remaking America” by circumventing representative democracy.