« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Of Course We Should Oppose Judge Sotomayor

Over at The Volokh Conspiracy legal blog, David Kopel points to a National Journal blogger poll showing bloggers confused about this issue. I was surprised that it is even a question.

Lefty bloggers think Republicans should not oppose the Sotomayor appointment. They, naturally, think she’s the best thing for the country since Barack Obama.

Right-leaning bloggers are split, with most thinking it would be counterproductive, or at best unproductive, to oppose her.

Here’s a case where the majority is wrong. We must oppose Sotomayor, because she is a weak addition to the Supreme Court. While in a partisan strategic sense it is quite possible that having an inferior mind installed as the next Justice is a net positive, that may not be what is best for the country.

We must oppose her because it is a chance to state our position. The left loves to play ad hominem tu quoque, pointing out that we didn’t oppose some plan when proposed and are therefore hypocritical for opposing its implementation. We mustn’t give them that chance.

And most importantly, it is a time to educate. We oppose Sotomayor to show what we believe and to highlight what she believes. She believes, not so ironically, that racial justice demands installing less-qualified minority candidates when better-qualified majority candidates are available. She believes that judges should make policy, not merely judge the law. She shows every indication of being a doctrinaire leftist, and there are enough of those leading the Executive Branch that no more are needed in the Judicial.

We should oppose her. If the People are now so shallow that they read racism into that, then they do.

But they won’t.

(Cross-posted at The Minority Report)

COMMENTS

  • rbdwiggins

    Which is exactly why the “it’s counter-productive” narrative has been constructed, and why conservatives should dispel the myth and dispose of this thinly constructed narrative.

    The Obama Administration, congressional Democrats, moderate Republicans, liberal activists and the partisan press are using the same liberal/progressive playbook.

    If the narrative stands unopposed, it will become a Known Fact.™

  • Kyle-MI

    I keep hearing from some conservatives that we should keep our powder dry or save our arrows (i.e. not oppose Sotomayor) because she is just replacing another liberal and has the Dem votes locked up anyway. What I don’t understand from these arguments is how are powder is getting wet or our arrows are being used up by opposing this nominee now. If we do win (a long shot I will admit) then we are strengthened for the next time. If we loose, how are we any worse off?

    Anyway, just my long-winded way of saying that I agree with you, Socrates. Good diary.

  • rbdwiggins

    By that logic: The federal bureaucracy is so overwhelmed, there’s no need to ever vote Democratic again.

  • itrytobenice

    as to whether or not they should oppose Alito and Roberts. The quick, unambiguous answer was Yes, even though both nominees were exceptionally intelligent, talented and judicious.

    Now BO picks an unserious, unpleasant (according to her colleagues) regularly-overturned nominee and we can’t figure out whether or not we should support her? I’m beginning to think there are mentally defective people presenting the public face of our party.

    • IJB

      (And I can’t believe I’m even saying that!) Their opposition to Roberts was much more half-hearted than their opposition to Alito.

      I’d *maybe* agree with “keeping our powder dry” if I thought the Senate GOP would oppose Obama’s second nominee as much as Senate Dems opposed G.W. Bush’s second nominee.

      As it is, I don’t believe it. At all.

      I’m getting pretty close to pulling the pin on these guys. If they do nothing to oppose this nominee, and she passes with the same kind of vote that Ginsberg did, I think my patience with the Republican party, and in fact the entire American political process, will have reached its limit.

  • JHancock

    Do we risk someone worse?? Sure Sotomayor is far far far left on identity politics, the race card, and “Social Justice”–but so far her record has been fairly neutral on abortion, which is honestly more than I’d hoped from an Obama pick. Her ruling on the Firefighter case is inexcusable, but her upholding of the Mexico City Rule shows she can actually think for herself instead of just repeating leftist rhetoric–also one of the GOP’s main goals is to keep FOCA from codifying RVW and Sotomayor has already upheld the rights of states to decide not to fund abortion in her Mexico City ruling. Sure an experienced strict constructionist with pro life stance and reluctance to legislate from the bench would be better, but were either going to get a race card candidate from Obama or a Gender card feminatzi baby killer–personally I prefer the Race pick over the pro-abortion pick.

    • ajbritt

      If we oppose Sotomayor how do we know we won’t get someone worse? I was surprised Obama chose someone who is a pro-life. If we oppose Sotomayor we may get a pro-choice/pro-abortion Supreme Court Justice.

  • Socrates

    That’s frustrating.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    We’ve had people publish a diary and then disappear it later, which later opened RS to charges that we in on hiding certain accusations.

    So we disallow editing of published diaries. You are encouraged in the future to save your diary and preview it before publishing.

    I’ll fix your links.

  • bs

    click “Create New Diary Entry”. Then click “Manage”. Then select your diary, and you should be able to edit it.

    By no means is this an intuitive procedure…

  • bs

    I didn’t know Neil had turned that off.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens