So far the Republicans have failed to instill in the American public a fear of Sonia Sotomayor.   But I have faith that they will keep trying.  However, as the public is introduced to Sotomayor, the Republicans will become more and more enraged that their bigoted tactics just aren’t going to work.

Rather than look at Sotomayor’s judicial work, the Republicans would prefer to hammer and yammer about comments she made years ago as evidence that she will be unable to keep an open and judicious mind while sitting on the high court.  Well, for those who really are interested in her judicial leanings instead of old comments, the SCOTUS  blog has an analysis of her appellate court decisions.

The analysis is eyeopening in that it contradicts the Republican picture of an out-of-control, left-wing, screaming Hispanic woman who just happens to be a justice.  So let’s begin with some race cases – the area that so frightens the ‘Publicans.  In the 96 race-related cases in which Sotomayor  has been involved, Sotomayor REJECTED THE CLAIM OF DISCRIMINATION roughly 78 times.  She and the panel agreed with the claim of discrimination only 10 times.

Of the 10 cases favoring claims of discrimination, 9 were unanimous – meaning Sotomayor wasn’t alone in her rejection of the claims.  Of the 9, in 7, the unanimous panel included at least one Republican.  Judge Sotomayor rejected claims of discrimination by a margin of 8-1 – truly something the ‘Publlicans don’t want to hear, let alone acknowledge.

In sum, in an eleven-year career on the Second Circuit, Judge Sotomayor participated in approximately 100 panel decisions involving questions of race and has disagreed with her colleagues a total of four times.  Wowee!  Four times.  Given her record, it really is absurd and unfounded to say that Judge Sotomayor has allowed race to infect her decisionmaking.

Photo credit:  Wikipedia


So just exactly what is it that the bigoted and scared Republicans want?  Could it be that they won’t be happy until the high Court is once again all male and all white?  Poor ‘Publicans, this must just be more than they can take.  But it really is about time that the center moderate Republicans of this nation woke up and stopped letting the party right-wingers a la Limbaugh the Loser control their thoughts and minds by instilling fear of virtually everything.

Bigoted and scared – not a pleasant position for the Republicans to occupy.  But one which they apparently enjoy!


About Charlotte A. Weybright

I own a home in the historical West Central Neighborhood of Fort Wayne, Indiana. I have four grown sons and nine grandchildren - four grandsons and five granddaughters. I love to work on my home, and I enjoy crafts of all types. But, most of all, I enjoy being involved in political and community issues.
This entry was posted in Democrats, Federal Courts, Judicial System, Republican Party, Republicans, Supreme Court and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Iceironman says:

    Why are conservatives bigoted again?? I would love nothing more than 9 Sara Palins and Condy Rices on the court, Is that bigoted??? I guess you are correct, I am a little scared. I find it hard to believe the court can find abortion legal from the constitution, but 4 out of 5 cant find in the constitution where I have the right to own a gun. Sotomayor stance—–A 2004 opinion she joined also cited as precedent that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” CLEARLY CLEARLY. Even you believe it is a right. She has been overturned something like 60%??? So yes, I am scared, not of a latina, not of a woman, but of a progressive liberal who will side with Kelo, who will take guns, who will plain take. I think your stereo typing conservatives is getting old. We want blind justice, we could care less about ethnic background or sex.

    That reminds me of the Democrat convention, the news networks had a scroll at the bottom saying stuff like, 2% of the convention is lesbian woman, 3% are gay white males, 16 % are white males 19% are hispanic yada yada. I guess that stuff is more important to progressive liberals. Kinda makes me want to puke.

  2. Iceironman says:

    Here is a little reason they want Sotomayor pushed through quickley……….WASHINGTON — Sonia Sotomayor has a classic American story. So does Frank Ricci.

    Ricci is a New Haven firefighter stationed seven blocks from where Sotomayor went to law school — Yale. Raised in blue-collar Wallingford, Conn., Ricci struggled as a C and D student in public schools ill-prepared to address his serious learning disabilities. Nonetheless he persevered, becoming a junior firefighter and Connecticut’s youngest certified emergency medical technician.

    After studying fire science at a community college, he became a New Haven “truckie,” the guy who puts up ladders and breaks holes in burning buildings. When his department announced exams for promotions, he spent $1,000 on books, quit his second job so he could study eight to 13 hours a day and, because of his dyslexia, hired someone to read him the material.

    He placed sixth on the lieutenant’s exam, which qualified him for promotion. Except that the exams were thrown out by the city, and all promotions denied, because no blacks had scored high enough to be promoted.

    Ricci (with 19 others) sued.

    That’s where these two American stories intersect. Sotomayor was a member of the three-member circuit court panel that upheld the dismissal of his case, thus denying Ricci his promotion.

    This summary ruling deeply disturbed fellow members of Sotomayor’s court, including Judge Jose Cabranes (a fellow Clinton appointee) who, writing for five others, criticized the unusual, initially unpublished, single-paragraph dismissal for ignoring the serious constitutional issues at stake.

    Two things are sure to happen this summer: The Supreme Court will overturn Sotomayor’s panel’s ruling. And, barring some huge hidden scandal, Sotomayor will be elevated to that same Supreme Court.

    What should a principled conservative do? Use the upcoming hearings not to deny her the seat, but to illuminate her views. No magazine gossip from anonymous court clerks. No “temperament” insinuations. Nothing ad hominem. The argument should be elevated, respectful and entirely about judicial philosophy.

    On the Ricci case. And on her statements about the inherent differences between groups, and the superior wisdom she believes her Latina physiology, culture and background grant her over a white male judge. They perfectly reflect the Democrats’ enthrallment with identity politics, which assigns free citizens to ethnic and racial groups possessing a hierarchy of wisdom and entitled to a hierarchy of claims upon society.

    Sotomayor shares President Barack Obama’s vision of empathy as being at the heart of judicial decisionmaking — sympathetic concern for litigants’ background and current circumstances, and for how any judicial decision would affect their lives.

    I guess empathy is great as long as you are the right color??? Watch for this to be overturned.

  3. Ice:

    Please address the statistics I provided in my article – not sporadic “pick and choose” incidences which you are using to support your position.

    The SCOTUS blog writer analyzed – yes, analyzed – 96 cases, not just one or two.

    It will be the overall pattern that is important. All justices every now and then break from what would appear to be a predictable pattern and make decisions that their supporters may or may not understand.

    Also, if you are going to use material from articles, posts, etc., please give credit and the website so those of us who wish to read the article can do so. Thanks.

  4. Iceironman says:

    I read the entire blog. I read the entire case of Gant. I know she throws out discrimination cases with no merrit (no clear black v white if you will). But it seems as soon as a minority does not get what another gets it is automaticaly race. Just as with the firefighters, it must have been race right? Just as with Gant, he was the only black kid in the school, two other white boys who couldnt keep up were put in a “middle class”. The black boy was put back to Kindergarden. So, out of this vast population of 3, we have discrimination???? The teacher made efforts, called past schools, talked with parents, and finaly made the decision to help him by putting him back a level. If she did not care and was a racist, wouldnt the teacher just pass the child, and not try to help. This way he could sweep floors and not take any good jobs from the MAN? She didnt move him based on color, she moved him on the fact that he was behind even more than the others.

    Cases like this destroy.

  5. Norma says:

    So all the Borking of Republican candidates isn’t hate or fear or bigotry. It’s only when Republicans ask questions? Interesting.

  6. Norma:

    No, both sides are guilty of the same tactics. It is now Obama’s turn to appoint a justice or justices, so I would expect nothing less of the Republicans and conservatives. I am just writing about it because that is my point of view, and I am calling attention to it.

    When Bork was rejected in 1987, I believe the Senate was controlled by the Republicans. Bork lost by the worst vote ever, so his defeat appears to have been a bipartisan effort.

  7. Iceironman says:

    Charlotte, will you do a post with research on how far our government can go before you get a little freaked out. It seems you will not get nervous or skeptical of government (unless GW is in power). Please listen to the testomonies of CEOs to congress on the pressure from Obama. How far is too far for government to get into business and our lives?

  8. Ice:

    Off topic again, but here is a little bit of news as to why I am not concerned.

    Ten of the larger banks are paying back TARP funds with interest. That must really gripe Republicans – maybe things will work out after all, and that certainly would throw a crimp in their constant Obama bashing.

    I know, I know, you will find something wrong with the repayment.

Comments are closed.