The polls are turning on Sotomayor


I’m not particularly sold on Sonia Sotomayor one way or the other, other than to believe that nothing good could ever come from Obama.  My lawyer colleagues here on Redstate are much better versed on the merits of her rulings and arguments in the courtroom, but they are not necessarily free to pass judgment on them, as there could be conflicts of interest in the future.  It does seem that while she is certainly not a nominee that would come from a Republican president, she could be less harmful than some of the alternatives.

Despite what one thinks of her potential benefit or damage to the rule of law in the United States, it seems that Ms. Sotomayor’s journey to the Supreme Court bench has hit a couple of speed bumps.  First it was her borderline-racist statements implying that a “wise Latina” judge would reach better conclusions than a “white male who hasn’t lived that life,” and the fact that her comments were not an isolated incident, contrary to the spin of the Obama administration.  That particular episode seemed to be defused by th administration, as it seems to (at the time) have had little impact on her popularity.  But it appears the latest, more significant courtroom events have had an impact on the public’s perception of Ms. Sotomayor.

This week the Supreme Court’s Ricci v. DeStefano decision directly reversed one of Sotomayor’s rulings. The court ruled 5-4 that the firefighters in question were discriminated against, in contradiction with Sotomayor’s opinion.  And although the decision was 5-4, all nine SCOTUS justices disagreed with her disposition on the case.  But here’s the key - the Obama lapdog media heavily covered the story and made it crystal clear that it was her ruling that was overridden, a fact that I suppose was undeniable, thus making it pretty much mandatory that they report it.  This apparently has had a discernible impact on her public perception.  The Rasmussen polling firm found that “37% now believe Sotomayor should be confirmed while 39% disagree.”  This reflects a twelve-point decline in the public support for Sotomayor from before the Supreme Court ruling.  Prior to the Ricci ruling, there was already debate about Sotomayor’s reversal rate at the Supreme Court level.  One could argue that the drop in popularity is, in part, a delayed reaction to the accumulation of information that has been made public since her nomination, combined with the Court’s ruling.

On Wednesday, on his blog, William Jacobson pointed out how a month ago the polling information was important in pointing out how “Obama apparently found the American political center in appointing her” … and he asks “does that mean the polls still are relevant when the polls are not so good?”  Heh…good question, sir.

So now does that mean that this polling result indicates that Obama should have second thoughts about his support for Sotomayor?   Her ruling on the Ricci case jives with her previous racially-tinged comments and brings cause for concern about how she will continue her affirmative action activism from the bench.

Category: , , ,

RSS feed | Trackback URI

10 Comments Leave a comment

"And although the decision was 5-4, all nine SCOTUS justices disagreed with her disposition on the case."

evanm Thursday, July 2nd at 3:25PM EDT (link)

I am so glad somebody else pointed that out.

That is my rallying cry against Sotomayor from here on out.

 

It isn't just racism.

Flagstaff Thursday, July 2nd at 7:52PM EDT (link)

It’s evidence of a non-reflective personality, not exactly desirable in a Supreme Court Justice.

In fact, the “wise Latina woman” is as unsuitable for the Court as Bush’s personal counsel was. A difference between Dems and Pubs is that the Pubs were willing to stand up against an unsuitable appointment. The Dems won’t do that, because they see the characteristic that makes her unsuitable as a positive one.

Pluto, the Ninth Planet - Forever!

 

it's funny...

cannedjam Thursday, July 2nd at 10:47PM EDT (link)

that the SCOTUS overturning of the Ricci case further chips away at the very system of discrimination that directly lead to her to being in a position to be considered for the same court.

In her mind it is better to lower the bar to achieve racial diversity than focus on the underlying issue of the systematic under-qualification of minorities in the first place. The result of a failing school system/strangle hold of the teachers union, and issues in the respective communities, but hey it’s much harder and takes much longer to address those issues, so lets just give people an artificial boost, jumping over qualified non-minorities to “even the playing field”, all in the name of the “greater good”.

not just non-minorities cannedjam...

Aaron Gardner Thursday, July 2nd at 10:55PM EDT (link)

heck there are many shades, if you will, of minority status. The statist uses the class warfare in all arguments. Whether it is economic classes or social classes you can bet they are their exploiting it. Black over Hispanics, Asians over Blacks, Hispanics over Blacks. It is inherent of the system the constant choosing in every situation who is the minority most impacted. Situational ethics in action.

Aaron’s Archive

conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!

oops...

cannedjam Thursday, July 2nd at 11:48PM EDT (link)

my subsequent post was meant to be a reply…

 
 
 

the biggest problem...

cannedjam Thursday, July 2nd at 11:47PM EDT (link)

with their thought process is that they justify their policies based on “fairness”. How many times have we heard Obama invoke the term? Only problem is, the only person who can truly decide what is fair is God himself, and anyone who proposes to posses that power is falsely professing.

reply to this goof

LibRick Friday, July 3rd at 6:56AM EDT (link)

see post below

 
 

I agree with your

LibRick Friday, July 3rd at 6:56AM EDT (link)

statement that “the only person who can truly decide what is fair is God himself” (though I’d rather not see the singular term person for used for God … blessed trinity.)

But, to be “fair”, invocation of the term “fairness” is done by the left, right, and everybody in between.

to an extent...

cannedjam Friday, July 3rd at 11:22AM EDT (link)

but it is the left that uses it as a basis for their social policy. I believe, and I could be wrong, that the left has a monopoly on invoking “fairness” when it comes to forcing one group of people to make sacrifices for another.

 
 

Monopoly, I disagree...

LibRick Friday, July 3rd at 1:27PM EDT (link)

but I would agree with you that the left uses and wears the term “fair” out at orders of magnitude above and beyond what any other groups does.

 

Leave a Comment

 

Be respectful, or be banned. No Profanity.