When I was at Daily Kos writing about the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the SCOTUS, I attempted to concentrate on their views on the issues. Particularly with Roberts, I urged that the Senate demand answers on issues like privacy, executive power and other important Constitutional matters. I have never accepted the idea that because an issue could come before the Court, nominees could avoid answering questions on those matters. Unfortunately, the Sotomayor nomination discussion has been derailed by blatant sexism and racism. It should be about the issues. NYTimes' Charlie Savage reports on NARAL bringing the discussion back to the issues and demanding answers from the nominee:

Nancy Keenan, president of the National Abortion Rights Action League, urged them to pressure senators to demand that Judge Sotomayor reveal her views on privacy rights before any confirmation vote. “Discussion about Roe v. Wade will—and must—be part of this nomination process,” Ms. Keenan wrote, adding. “As you know, choice hangs in the balance on the Supreme Court as the last two major choice-related cases were decided by a five-to-four margin.”

I agree with NARAL. In addition, there are many other issues that require detailed questioning -among these executive power. Let's get back to the issues.

Speaking for me only

Via Jason Zengerle, here's an anecdote from Judge Sonia Sotomayor's law school days that demonstrates her fighting spirit:

A large Washington law firm-Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge-has been forced to apologize to a Yale Law School senior after a student-faculty tribunal found one of its partners had asked her "discriminatory" questions focusing on her being a Puerto Rican. . . . The questions, according to the tribunal, included: 'Do law firms do a disservice by hiring minority students who the firms know do not have the necessary credentials and will then fire in three to four years? Would I have been admitted to the law school if I were not a Puerto Rican? Was I culturally deprived?" . . . Krall asked the questions of Sonia Sotomayor de Noonan, a resident of the Bronx, N.Y., who had graduated from Princeton before going to Yale Law, during a dinner in New Haven Oct. 2 with several other Yale students.

Sotomayor had the courage to stare down these racist questioners. Not an easy thing to do, especially when you are in your last year of law school.

Speaking for me only

Digby writes:

Al Hunt just told Andrea Mitchell that Obama could have picked a "more formidable intellectual force" for the court but he threaded the political needle very well. When Andrea Mitchell went on to ask if the White House was holding a conference call later to reassure people about her intellectual abilities, Hunt said that she wasn't as bad as Alberto Gonzales.

. . . I'm sure villagers like Al Hunt, who are so willing to believe that snide backstabbing about Sotomayor's intellect despite the clear evidence to the contrary, don't believe that they are on the same page as Limbaugh, but they are.

Al Hunt is not a lawyer and is utterly unqualified to pass judgment on Sonia Sotomayor's legal and intellectual qualities. But he is not shy to provide his views on the matter. Which makes him an idiot. Or a racist. You make the call.

Speaking for me only

Matt Yglesias writes:

As anyone who knows me can attest, I don’t have what you’d call a strong “Hispanic” identity. . . . But for all that, I have to say that I am really truly deeply and personally pissed off [about] the tenor of a lot of the commentary on Sonia Sotomayor. The idea that any time a person with a Spanish last name is tapped for a job, his or her entire lifetime of accomplishments is going to be wiped out in a riptide of bitching and moaning about “identity politics” is not a fun concept for me to contemplate. Qualifications like time at Princeton, Yale Law, and on the Circuit Court that work well for guys with Italian names suddenly don’t work if you have a Spanish name. Heaven forbid someone were to decide that there ought to be at least one Hispanic columnist at a major American newspaper.

I do have a strong identity with my hispanic background and have been in a rage about this since Jeff Rosen pulled his BS. In such a rage that I have not trusted myself to write on the issue. I am glad to see someone as level headed as Matt is seeing what I am seeing. Lets me know I am not crazy.

Speaking for me only

Looks like we're all busy at work today. Here's some stuff to think about:

• Law Prof Corey Young crunches some numbers on Judge Sotomayor's criminal record.

In the be careful what you wish for department, Bernie Kerik has been indicted in Washington for lying to the White House on his 2004 application for Homeland Security Chief. Similar charges were part of his New York indictment, but he had successfully moved to dismiss them.

In December, Kerik pleaded not guilty to another indictment in New York levying similar charges against him, but those charges were dismissed because the incident allegedly happened in Washington, officials said.

Now he faces trial on two indictments in separate districts.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Colorado is getting a spiffy new data-mining program, courtesy of a federal budget earmark. Of course, that's not what they call it (they call it a "crime fighting tool"), but a little digging shows that's what it is and many other states(Arizona is one) are using it too.

Another hint:

On Tues. May 26th the Colorado Information Sharing Consortium will hold a special news conference on the steps of the state capitol to unveil its latest crime fighting tool, a statewide data sharing network called “COPLINK”. This new system will allow street cops and investigators to analyze information regarding individuals, property, vehicles, and incidents from a variety of state and local law enforcement records.

Coplink is sold by Knowledge Computing Corp. [More...]

This afternoon Vice President Joe Biden walked into M&D's, a local barbecue haunt in Denver, before speaking at a Middle Class Task Force at the Natural History Museum. He was a hit with the customers.

Tomorrow he gives the commencement address at the Air Force Academy.

I want to know where he was for dinner. The TL Kid and I were driving back from the Lowry area -- going west on Alameda -- around 6:00 pm. Around Quebec, he notices there are two cop cars parked on each side street. I suggest maybe it's "The Heat is on" D.U.I. campaign which relaunched this weekend. But we're in a boring, non-fancy, residential area. Would they be trying to get workers driving home after Happy Hour? Unlikely.

[More...]

After embarrassing himself, Jeff Rosen attempts rehabilitation:

Conservatives are already citing my initial piece on Sotomayor as a basis for opposing her. This willfully misreads both my piece and the follow-up response.

Sure Jeff, sure. Not to worry. Here comes Jonathan Turley:

Update: Here's the official White House statement on Judge Sotomayor's nomination.

The White House held a conference call for legal media today on the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor. I was on the fairly short (1/2 hr) call.

The call was led by Ron Klain (chief counsel to VP Biden). He made a brief statement and then took questions. Summary below: [More...]

Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) released a statement upon the announcement of President Obama's choice of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. He said:

I believe this criterion is essential; activist judges have no place on the highest court of the land.

Pryor voted to confirm Chief Justice Roberts and for cloture for Justice Alito, both of whom were in the majority in the most blatantly judicially activist Court decision in recent memory, Parents Involved v. Seattle School District, where the court struck down a desegregation plan approved by the elected body chosen by the people of Seattle. That blatant act of judicial activism stands in stark contrast to the now controversial Second Circuit decision Ricci v. Destafano (PDF). The opinion is reproduced in its entirety below the fold.

Update: Here's the opinion (pdf. How Appealing has uploaded it here.

Update: "A divided California Supreme Court today let stand Proposition 8, continuing marriage discrimination in California. The Court refused to undo the 18,000 marriages that same-sex couples celebrated in 2008, so that those couples remain married even while other California couples are, for now, barred from joining in marriage." [More...]

Atlantic has Specter's reaction:

I applaud the nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Her confirmation would add needed diversity in two ways: the first Hispanic and the third woman to serve on the high court. While her record suggests excellent educational and professional qualifications, now it is up to the Senate to discharge its constitutional duty for a full and fair confirmation process.

Judiciary Committe Chairman Senator Patrick Leahy released this statement: [More...]