Readers of National Review’s Bench Memos have seen our merry band highlight enough inconsistencies between what Judge Sotomayor is saying now compared to, oh, what she has said publicly for all of her previous life, to have doubts as to whether maybe, just maybe, she is being less than forthcoming. Well, it seems that not all of the Senators are buying what she has to sell either. In response to a question from Commentary’s Contentions blogger Jennifer Rubin at Heritage’s recent Tele- Town Hall, Senator Jim DeMint referred to Judge Sotomayor’s assertion that she never read and was unaware of the PRLDEF legal arguments (which included such gems as arguing that a failure to provide public funds for abortions is akin to Dred Scott’s denial of citizenship) as a "jaw-dropper." Furthermore, Senator DeMint didn’t seem to be buying Judge Sotomayor’s answers from their private meeting together, in which she claimed that she had never thought about whether unborn children have any rights. Given her claims of ignorance regarding PRLDEF, former Attorney General Ed Meese told Rubin that the Committee must engage in further fact-finding:
Meese went onto explain that it is now critical for senators to insist that the PRLDEF documents, which have yet to be produced in their entirety for the Senate, be obtained to verify or disprove Sotomayor’s startling claim that she was ignorant of the legal positions being taken by a group for which she served both as a board member and on the litigation committee. He added that until the documents are produced the hearings should be continued. That, he said, is what must be done when "critical issues" arise "concerning the veracity of the candidate."
You don't suppose that judge Sotomayor is a product of the "dumbing down" that has taken place in the U.S.A highschools, colleges and universaties over the last 45 years?
When you open a box of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get. Now we know, and I am scared of her. No, I can't have empathy for any those who should know and doesn't; congress included.
A lawyer AND a judge who has never thought about the law enunciated in Roe v Wade. Either she is a liar, or a dunce. If she has no curiousity, or no need to critically evaluate Supreme Court decisions, then she is too disinterested to be on the Court.
But then, who are we kidding? We can ALL tell she's been lying. It will make no difference to Democrats.
I watched the hearings, and I have to ask, will the real Sonia Sotomayor please stand up? All the quotes from her past speeches and writings and video appearances, and all she can say is "I follow precedent"? The problem seems to be she follows the wrong precedent, even when the Supreme Court directs judges which precedent to follow.She pretends now to agree with Sandra Day-O'Conor(sp), when she is directly quoted as not agreeing with her. A vote to confirm this woman will be an embarrassment for any Senator who casts it. I hope Americans remember who they are and vote against them when they come up for re-election.
I am concerned that Sotomayor is all for using European law to for the US. Our laws have been around for over 200 years and have done us quite well, thank you. Also, she really should have been pressed for a more articulae answer on gun rights and ownership. Her answers on both are frighting. We do not need the laws of Europe or China to help in this country and when we give up our right to bear arms as citizens, we give up our freedoms.