Opening Statement of Judge Sonia Sotomayor
By MALDEF on 07/13/2009 @ 04:40 PM
Before the Senate Judiciary Committee
As Prepared for Delivery
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank Senators Schumer and Gillibrand for that kind introduction.
In recent weeks, I have had the privilege and pleasure of meeting eighty-nine gracious Senators, including all the members of this Committee. I thank you for the time you have spent with me. Our meetings have given me an illuminating tour of the fifty states and invaluable insights into the American people.
There are countless family members, friends, mentors, colleagues, and clerks who have done so much over the years to make this day possible. I am deeply appreciative for their love and support. I want to make one special note of thanks to my mom. I am here today because of her aspirations and sacrifices for both my brother Juan and me. Mom, I love that we are sharing this together. I am very grateful to the President and humbled to be here today as a nominee to the United States Supreme Court.
The progression of my life has been uniquely American. My parents left Puerto Rico during World War II. I grew up in modest circumstances in a Bronx housing project. My father, a factory worker with a third grade education, passed away when I was nine years old.
On her own, my mother raised my brother and me. She taught us that the key to success in America is a good education. And she set the example, studying alongside my brother and me at our kitchen table so that she could become a registered nurse. We worked hard. I poured myself into my studies at Cardinal Spellman High School, earning scholarships to Princeton University and then Yale Law School, while my brother went to medical school. Our achievements are due to the values that we learned as children, and they have continued to guide my life’s endeavors. I try to pass on this legacy by serving as a mentor and friend to my many godchildren and students of all backgrounds.
Over the past three decades, I have seen our judicial system from a number of different perspectives – as a big-city prosecutor, a corporate litigator, a trial judge and an appellate judge. My first job after law school was as an assistant District Attorney in New York. There, I saw children exploited and abused. I felt the suffering of victims’ families torn apart by a loved one’s needless death. And I learned the tough job law enforcement has protecting the public safety. In my next legal job, I focused on commercial, instead of criminal, matters. I litigated issues on behalf of national and international businesses and advised them on matters ranging from contracts to trademarks.
My career as an advocate ended—and my career as a judge began—when I was appointed by President George H.W. Bush to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. As a trial judge, I decided over four hundred and fifty cases, and presided over dozens of trials, with perhaps my best known case involving the Major League Baseball strike in 1995.
After six extraordinary years on the district court, I was appointed by President William Jefferson Clinton to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On that Court, I have enjoyed the benefit of sharing ideas and perspectives with wonderful colleagues as we have worked together to resolve the issues before us. I have now served as an appellate judge for over a decade, deciding a wide range of Constitutional, statutory, and other legal questions.
Throughout my seventeen years on the bench, I have witnessed the human consequences of my decisions. Those decisions have been made not to serve the interests of any one litigant, but always to serve the larger interest of impartial justice.
In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law. The task of a judge is not to make the law – it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress’s intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court. In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand.
The process of judging is enhanced when the arguments and concerns of the parties to the litigation are understood and acknowledged. That is why I generally structure my opinions by setting out what the law requires and then by explaining why a contrary position, sympathetic or not, is accepted or rejected. That is how I seek to strengthen both the rule of law and faith in the impartiality of our justice system. My personal and professional experiences help me listen and understand, with the law always commanding the result in every case.
Since President Obama announced my nomination in May, I have received letters from people all over this country. Many tell a unique story of hope in spite of struggles. Each letter has deeply touched me. Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come to New York all those years ago. It is our Constitution that makes that Dream possible, and I now seek the honor of upholding the Constitution as a Justice on the Supreme Court.
I look forward in the next few days to answering your questions, to having the American people learn more about me, and to being part of a process that reflects the greatness of our Constitution and of our nation. Thank you.
##
Justice Ginsburg on Sotomayor: "She'll Hold Her Own"
By MALDEF on 07/10/2009 @ 01:00 PM
On July 09, 2009, New York Times Magazine published an interview with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The article sheds some light on her thoughts on the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
Justice Ginsburg, who had hoped by now that there would be three or four women on the court, strongly believes that Sotomayor should be confirmed. When asked if the criticism of Sotomayor being a “bully” during questioning is due to her sex, Justice Ginsburg replied:
I can’t say that it was just that she was a woman. There are some people in Congress who would criticize severely anyone President Obama nominated. They’ll seize on any handle. One is that she’s a woman, another is that she made the remark about Latina women. And I thought it was ridiculous for them to make a big deal out of that. Think of how many times you’ve said something that you didn’t get out quite right, and you would edit your statement if you could. I’m sure she meant no more than what I mean when I say: Yes, women bring a different life experience to the table.
With Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing being Monday, July 13th, Justice Ginsburg stated:
I hope that these hearings for Sonia will be as civil as mine were and Steve Breyer’s were. Ours were unusual in that respect.
Sotomayor has received heavy criticism about her assertiveness as a questioner, however is seems that her male counterparts are much more aggressive, and it goes unquestioned. Justice Ginsburg answered:
Yes, the notion that Sonia is an aggressive questioner — what else is new? Has anybody watched Scalia or Breyer up on the bench?
Justice Ginsburg became familiar with Sotomayor through being the Second Circuit Justice and attending the Judicial Conference once a year. She is confident that Sotomayor will not only fit in, but also "hold her own". Ginsburg notes that although they are both women, they are very different in their style. Sotomayor has had ample experience in all levels of law, and may in fact be the first justice who didn’t have English as her native language.
Judge Sotomayor has stated that she is a product of affirmative action, but so has Justice Ginsburg. Ginsburg notes that if it weren’t for the push from the Nixon administration, she would not have been appointed to the law school at Columbia.
I understand that there is a thought that people will point to the affirmative-action baby and say she couldn’t have made it if she were judged solely on the merits. But when I got to Columbia I was well regarded by my colleagues even though they certainly disagreed with many of the positions that I was taking. They backed me up: If that’s what I thought, I should be able to speak my mind.
American Bar Association Gives Sotomayor its Highest Rating
By MALDEF on 07/07/2009 @ 03:16 PM
As previously reported, the American Bar Association had commenced a review process for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor shortly after President Obama announced her nomination. Today, the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary released its ratings for Judge Sotomayor and several other nominees to federal judgeships.
From the Blog of Legal Times:
The [Standing Committee], by a unanimous vote, has rated her "well-qualified" for the Court. It's the highest rating the committee gives, and it's the same rating the committee gave to the four most recent additions to the Supreme Court.
Those four most recent additions are Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Given that these Justices span the entire philosophical spectrum of the Supreme Court, Sotomayor’s opponents will be hard-pressed to argue against her qualifications to serve on the nation’s highest court.
The committee is made up of 15 lawyers from around the country, each representing a different federal judicial circuit (except the sprawling 9th Circuit, which has two committee members, and the committee chair, who can come from anywhere). It evaluates all nominees for Article III judgeships — by interviewing lawyers and studying nominees' work — and then produces a report, though the committee releases only its final rating.
More from the Blog of Legal Times here.
Pro-Life Activist Launches Twelve City Tour to "Defeat Sotomayor"
By MALDEF on 07/06/2009 @ 01:26 PM
Right Wing Watch posted this article this morning on their website. With one week to go to the Sotomayor hearings we can certainly expect more attacks and baseless rhetoric.
The Associated Press published an article today reporting that, with just a week to go before the start of Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court confirmation hearing, "Republicans are floundering" and conservatives are getting miffed that their efforts to undermine her nomination have not be gaining traction.
One conservative activist is moving forward with his campaign to stop Sotomayor, regardless of the GOP's reluctance. Randall Terry, best known recently for controversial comments made after the killing of Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller, has launched a twelve-city "Filibuster Sotomayor Tour." The tour will go through Nebraska, Montana, Kansas, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and will culminate in Washington DC, where Terry plans to attend the confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court nominee. Terry's website, OverturnRoe.Com, provides visitors with a flyer containing graphic images and a photo portraying Sotomayor as the "Angel of Death."
"We must stop permitting this hypocrisy, cowardice, and treachery in our midst. Pro-life voters are calling on pro-life Senators to filibuster Sotomayor.
"A Senator cannot say, 'I want to overturn Roe,' and then vote to confirm a Supreme Court Judge that will uphold Roe. A vote to confirm Sotomayor is a vote to uphold Roe.
"Many senators use pro-life rhetoric to seduce us; they get our money, our volunteer labor, and our votes. But once an election is over, they discard us like an embarrassing mistress. They say that they want to overturn Roe, but they do little or nothing to protect the innocent. Whether they are 'pro-life' Republicans like John McCain (AZ) and Sam Brownback (KS), or pro-life Democrats like Ben Nelson (NE) or Robert Casey (PA), we have been lied to again and again.
"Whether they 'have the votes' to sustain a filibuster or not, they need to fight to stop her, for the sake of the babies who will die under her judicial reign.
Filibuster Sotomayor Tour
Mon. July 6 --
Omaha, NE
7:00 PM Filibuster Rally
The Regency Lodge
909 South 107th Avenue
Omaha, NE 68114
[...]Sun. July 12 --
Supreme Court
2:30 P.M. Rally
Washington DCMon. July 13 --
At Sotomayor hearings.
New York City Bar Association Rates Sotomayor “Highly Qualified”
By MALDEF on 07/01/2009 @ 02:38 PM
On Tuesday, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York concluded that Judge Sonia Sotomayor was “highly qualified” to serve as an Associate Justice in the United States Supreme Court. The Bar Association’s press release stated that:
Judge Sotomayor demonstrates a formidable intellect; a diligent and careful approach to legal decision-making; a commitment to unbiased, thoughtful administration of justice; a deep commitment to our judicial system and the counsel and litigants who appear before the court; and an abiding respect for the powers of the legislative and the executive branches of our government.
Indeed, Judge Sonia Sotomayor is the first candidate to receive the “highly qualified” rating. Before 2007, the Association rated Supreme Court nominees in a two-tier system, either as “qualified” or “not qualified.” How does one attain the designation of “highly qualified”?
The nominee is qualified, to an exceptionally high degree, such that the nominee is likely to be an outstanding Justice of the United States Supreme Court. This rating should be regarded as an exception, and not the norm, for United States Supreme Court nominees.
The Bar Association sees Judge Sonia Sotomayor not only as fully qualified, but as an “exceptional” candidate. In May, shortly after President Obama announced her nomination, the New York State Bar Association called Sotomayor “uniquely qualified to fill the seat being vacated by Justice David Souter.”
The American Bar Association (ABA) also has an evaluation process, and is currently underway, according to the Blog of Legal Times. If the ABA also gives her high marks on her qualifications, how will Sotomayor’s critics base their opposition to her, particularly when legal organizations are finding she has a “a commitment to unbiased, thoughtful administration of justice”?
Sotomayor Shows Precision in Areas of Civil Rights and Constitutional Protections
By Alliance for Justice on 06/30/2009 @ 02:36 AM
To view this video, you will need to install the Flash Player and turn Javascript on.
Today, Alliance for Justice released the last in a series of in-depth reports examining the record of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. During a press briefing on the report, Vanderbilt Associate Law Professor and Hispanics for a Fair Judiciary member Terry Maroney summed up Sotomayor’s style by stating, “What comes through loud and clear is that she takes a scalpel approach rather than a hammer approach resulting in absolute precision.” Speaking about the recently decided Ricci case, AFJ Legal Director Bill Yeomans clarified that “the Supreme Court decision in Ricci created a new standard that Sotomayor could not have applied previously as a circuit court judge.”
Over the last month, AFJ has released a new report each week, providing thorough analysis of key areas of Judge Sotomayor’s record. You can read all of the reports on our Supreme Court Watch page. This final report focuses on civil rights and constitutional protections, finding that similar to the rest of her record Sotomayor is “a model of judicial restraint, acutely and openly conscious of the limits imposed by her role as a judge.”
Judge Sotomayor and Business and Consumer Law
By Alliance for Justice on 06/24/2009 @ 10:22 AM
Yesterday, Alliance for Justice released a report and hosted a telebriefing for the press on Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s business and consumer law record. Joining AFJ in the briefing were Prof. Eduardo Peñalver of Cornell University Law School and Hispanics for a Fair Judiciary, and National Consumers League Executive Director Sally Greenberg.
This report, the third in a series on Judge Sotomayor, examines her consumer and business law record, including labor and environmental law, bankruptcy, consumer protection and intellectual property among other issue areas. For those of you who are baseball fans, or simply curious about President Obama’s comments regarding Judge Sotomayor’s “saving baseball” you may find the section on labor law of interest.
The report examines the case Silverman v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Comm. Inc.; Judge Sotomayor ended the 1995 baseball strike by issuing an injunction against baseball owners - allowing the players to go back to work and the baseball season to begin.
“At the time the case was before Judge Sotomayor, the baseball strike was the longest work stoppage in professional sports history and had caused the cancellation of the 1994 World Series. Judge Sotomayor ruled against the owners because after negotiations between the players and owners became difficult, the owners tried to unilaterally change the terms of the collective bargaining agreement under which the players had been working. Judge Sotomayor held that this was an unfair labor practice and issued an injunction to protect the public interest, to maintain public confidence in the country’s labor laws, to avoid irreparable injury to the players, and to put the players and owners in the same bargaining position they were in before the strike.”
Sally Greenberg and Eduardo Peñalver also provided insights on the broader lessons that can be gleaned from Judge Sotomayor's record in this area of the law. "Judge Sotomayor wants people to have their day in court, rather than letting inconsequential technicalities prevent people from being heard," observed Greenberg. "She meets issues of first impression with caution and careful analysis. She's very much in the tradition of a careful, respectful common law judge, much like the justice she will be replacing, David Souter," Peñalver noted.
The current economic climate means issues relating to business, bankruptcy, and consumer protection are more important than ever. Judge Sotomayor has extensive experience in these areas of the law and, as the report notes, her legal writings show her ability to “recognize the impact her decision will have on the parties involved in a case, [while betraying] no preset notions or biases.” You can read the full report here.
Currently reading page 3 of 3.
Previous Page 1 2 3