|
|
| Re: Food for Thought For Liberals (468898) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Food for Thought For Liberals |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Wed Jul 1 23:28:54 2009, in response to Re: Food for Thought For Liberals, posted by AMoreira81 on Wed Jul 1 23:14:29 2009. In the case of Sotomayor (and SCOTUS), it is a liberal for a liberal (Souter).Judge Sotomayor is competent, and she has achieved more in her field than most. But I don't regard her as the ideal candidate. Like many relatively recent (given the infrequent occurrence of vacancies) nominees, she was chosen mainly on the basis of political considerations, which I find unfortunate. Personally, the only judges on that court who I believe are intellectually suited for it are John Roberts and Stephen Breyer, more so on the latter. There were plenty of people around who have political views that the President would find satisfactory. I think that they weren't appointed because they weren't women with Hispanic surnames who had made out with some distinction in the law. Now, if the justice being replaced were Anthony Kennedy or Antonin Scalia (that either one will need replacement is not out of the realm of reality), that would have angered America. I don't see why that should be. The President is under no obligation to try to assure overlap between the judge vacating a seat and his successor. After all, the appointment of judges via the President and Senate is meant to be a check on reactionary or stultifying views of Supreme Court justices. |
|
|
|