Friday, June 05, 2009

Sotomayor Said Death Penalty Racist, Failed To Disclose So

Uh-huh. More good judgment from Bobo's choice for the US Supreme Court. And people get blasted for calling her racist comments racist. Wonder if those who blast them will also, to be fair and consistent, blast her for calling capital punishment racist, too?

Worse, she also failed to disclose that she had said that.

“It is . . . clear that (Sotomayor) has omitted controversial material from her past in which she asserts that '[c]apital punishment is associated with evident racism in our society' and advocated public opposition to restoring the death penalty in New York state,” Long wrote to the committee.

Sounds like Obama, who himself refuses to allow Americans to see his birth certificate (not the useless document his folks submitted) so as to prove he's American-born. And like he's hiding lots of other nasty baggage, with the help of the Old Media.

The memo that Sotomayor signed makes a number of “controversial, unsupported, and badly reasoned assertions” about the death penalty, Long added.

“It is certainly a significant omission from her Senate questionnaire that is clearly called for by the terms of Question 12(b),” Long added.

Well, what do we expect from Extreme Left-Wing Activists like Sotomayor?

Long said the memorandum provides “an important data point to flesh out the picture of Sotomayor that is emerging from her other writings, speeches and judicial opinions--a hard-left liberal judicial activist (...)

Good pick, Obama! Someone to further your hidden agenda via the Supreme Court!

Betcha he'll appoint her no matter what. 'Cause he's a Leftist, and Leftists will do the wrong thing because they'll convince themselves that it's actually the right thing.


As recently as 1997 the Supreme Court reiterated that even old precedents from the High Court bind all lower courts. The Seventh Circuit appropriately noted the Supreme Court’s instructions, and concluded that questions about whether the Second Amendment is incorporated, “are for the [Supreme Court’s] Justices rather than a court of appeals.” In other words, they recognized that after last year’s Heller case the Supreme Court appeared ready to incorporate the Second Amendment, but the Seventh Circuit considered their hands tied on the issue. They essentially have tossed the case up to the Supreme Court.

Contrast the Seventh Circuit’s opinion with Sotomayor’s Maloney case from the Second Circuit. This week the Seventh Circuit devoted nine pages to its analysis. The Ninth Circuit, which held in April that the Second Amendment is incorporated to the states, devoted 12 pages to its analysis.

Sotomayor’s Second Circuit devoted merely a single paragraph to the issue. The opinion does not even note that there has been a century of Supreme Court cases—15 cases, to be exact—incorporating various Bill of Rights provisions to the states. It simply embraced the 1886 Supreme Court case on the issue, said the Second Amendment does not apply whatsoever to the states, and then dropped the issue without further discussion.

Well-crafted judicial opinions lay out legal rules with clear reasoning to interpret the Constitution and provide guidance to other courts. The Second Circuit was the first appeals court after the Heller decision to consider whether the Second Amendment applies to the states. To routinely discard such an important question with a single paragraph is simply stunning.

Are you beginning to see a pattern here?