E-Mail from President Obama

"The President????"


I received an e-mail today from President Obama asking for my support of Sonia Sotomayor as Supreme Court nominee.

No, really. Here it is:

"Good Morning,

Yesterday, Judge Sonia Sotomayor made her opening statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee and moved another step closer to taking a seat on the United States Supreme Court. In case you missed it, watch the video of her opening statement here:



As President, there are few responsibilities more serious or consequential than the naming of a Supreme Court Justice, so I want to take this opportunity to tell you about the qualifications and character that informed my decision to nominate Judge Sotomayor.

Judge Sotomayor's brilliant legal mind is complemented by the practical lessons that can only be learned by applying the law to real world situations.

In the coming days, the hearings will cover an incredible body of work from a judge who has more experience on the federal bench than any incoming Supreme Court Justice in the last 100 years. Judge Sotomayor's professional background spans our judicial system — from her time as a big-city prosecutor and a corporate litigator, to her work as a federal trial judge on the U.S. District Court, and an appellate judge on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

And then there is Judge Sotomayor's incredible personal story. She grew up in a housing project in the South Bronx — her parents coming to New York from Puerto Rico during the Second World War. At the age of nine, she lost her father, and her mother worked six days a week just to put food on the table. It takes a certain resilience and determination to rise up out of such circumstances, focus, work hard and achieve the American dream.

This character shined through in yesterday's opening statement: Watch the video.

In Judge Sotomayor, our nation will have a Justice who will never forget her humble beginnings, will always apply the rule of law, and will be a protector of the Constitution that made her American dream and the dreams of millions of others possible. As she said so clearly yesterday, Judge Sotomayor's decisions on the bench "have been made not to serve the interests of any one litigant, but always to serve the larger interest of impartial justice."

In anticipation of today's first round of questioning, I hope you'll share this email widely, because Judge Sotomayor's confirmation is something that affects every American. It's important for these hearings to be about Judge Sotomayor's own record and her capacity for the job — not any political back and forth that some in Washington may use to distract you. What members of the Judiciary Committee, and the American people, will see today is a sharp and fearless jurist who does not let powerful interests bully her into breaking from the rule of law."

Thank you,
Barack Obama
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you can see, I am also attaching Judge Sotomayor's opening statement, which was attached to the e-mail.

I have a couple of responses to the President's words. First of all, while Sotomayor's rise is impressive, I am not sure it is relevant enough to override the concerns I have about her. I hope that the President is aware of how, in recent years, the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee ignored the humble backgrounds of Clarence Thomas, Janice Rogers-Brown and Miguel Estrada as they strove to destroy not only their nominations but their reputations as well.

I also have questions about the President's claim (and Sotomayor's) that she will always apply the rule of law over her personal views. That is precisely what is in question here. Her past statement before a law school audience about the importance of appeals courts in setting public policy (in which she immediately tried to retract the statement in a kidding manner, knowing she was on tape) gives me pause.

The comment about the "wise Latina" might be explained away except that she said it on more than one occasion. Though I would want to see a judiciary that is diverse-reflecting the overall population, I think that can be achieved without choosing judges according to ethnicity.

As the President points out, Sotomayor's resume says that she has the necessary qualifications for the position. Yet seven out of eight decisions involving Sotomayor which have gone up to the Supreme Court for review have been reversed. I am not sure that is a damning indictment because it could theoretically mean there is a problem with the Supreme Court. But it was her peremptory dismissal of the New Haven firefights lawsuit that concerns me. To me, that was case that screamed out for at least a full hearing, which Sotomayor denied.

If you read then-Senator Obama's statement on the confirmation of Judge Samuael Alito, it underlines the fact that this is all ideological-liberal vs conservative. Sotomayor will, in all probability, be an activist liberal judge, which is exactly what the President and the Democrats want. Alito was opposed because he was known to be conservative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Thursday, January 26, 2006
Floor Statement on the Confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, Jr.
Complete Text of Senator Barack Obama's statement on confirmation of Samuel Alito
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"First off, let me congratulate Senators Specter and Leahy for moving yet another confirmation process along with a civility that speaks well of the Senate.

As we all know, there's been a lot of discussion in the country about how the Senate should approach this confirmation process. There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have the complete authority to appoint his nominee, and the Senate should only examine whether or not the Justice is intellectually capable and an all-around nice guy. That once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question whether the judge should be confirmed.

I disagree with this view. I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe that it calls for meaningful advice and consent that includes an examination of a judge's philosophy, ideology, and record. And when I examine the philosophy, ideology, and record of Samuel Alito, I'm deeply troubled.

I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and qualifications necessary to serve. He's an intelligent man and an accomplished jurist. And there's no indication he's not a man of great character.

But when you look at his record - when it comes to his understanding of the Constitution, I have found that in almost every case, he consistently sides on behalf of the powerful against the powerless; on behalf of a strong government or corporation against upholding American's individual rights.

If there is a case involving an employer and an employee and the Supreme Court has not given clear direction, he'll rule in favor of the employer. If there's a claim between prosecutors and defendants, if the Supreme Court has not provided a clear rule of decision, then he'll rule in favor of the state. He's rejected countless claims of employer discrimination, even refusing to give some plaintiffs a hearing for their case. He's refused to hold corporations accountable numerous times for dumping toxic chemicals into water supplies, even against the decisions of the EPA. He's overturned a jury verdict that found a company liable for being a monopoly when it had over 90% of the market share at the time.

It's not just his decisions in these individual cases that give me pause - it's that decisions like these are the rule for Samuel Alito, not the exception.

When it comes to how checks and balances in our system are supposed to operate - the balance of power between the Executive Branch, Congress, and the Judiciary, Judge Alito consistently sides with the notion that a President should not be constrained by either Congressional acts or the check of the Judiciary. He believes in the overarching power of the President to engage in whatever the President deems to be appropriate policy. As a consequence of this, I'm extraordinarily worried about how Judge Alito might approach issues like wiretapping, monitoring of emails, or other privacy concerns that we've seen surface over the last several months.

In sum, I've seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge Alito that does not uphold the traditional role of the Supreme Court as a bastion of equality and justice for United States citizens.

Should he be confirmed, I hope that he proves me wrong. I hope that he shows the independence that I think is absolutely necessary in order for us to preserve our liberties and protect our citizens."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It all comes down to ideology. In the end, Sotomayor will be confirmed, and I hope the Republicans will not attack her character and make it ugly. I hope they will set a better example than was shown in the Thomas, Estrada and Brown hearings, but there are questions that must be asked of Sotomayor in regards to some of her past statements because they of valid points for discussion in deciding what kind of judges we want on our Supreme Court and what the role of judges ought to be.