Where Did Sotomayor's Empathy Go?
Obama's nominee sets out to prove that she can be as reserved (and mean) as any white male judge.
MoJo D.C. bureau Legal Affairs reporter Stephanie Mencimer is reporting live from inside the Sotomayor confirmation hearings this week. This is the wrap-up of Tuesday's action. For the latest analysis, watch our video and live blog here, or follow Stephanie's and David Corn's coverage on Twitter.
America finally got to hear from President Obama's first Supreme Court nominee on Tuesday and she turned out to be...kind of dull. Sonia Sotomayor's performance on day two of her confirmation hearing induced a heavy dose of Bork nostalgia—a longing for the days when we got straight answers out of would-be justices, even if the answers were sometimes offensive. Instead of hearing what Sotomayor thinks about the issues (or even the nonissues) of the day, we learned more about the deep-seated anxieties of white, male Republicans. Oh, and nunchucks. (Check out the video at the end of this article.)
Like all the GOP senators, Jon Kyl of Arizona pressed Sotomayor about the "wise Latina" comment, which she called a rhetorical flourish that "fell flat." Still, Kyl and his Republican colleagues seemed to suspect Sotomayor had been secretly plotting to foment an insurgency by giving speeches at law school luncheons. I got the impression he was waiting for her to jump up and yell, "Viva la revolution!"
Kyl did elicit one noteworthy tidbit from Sotomayor when he asked what she thought of Obama's argument that the last mile of judging is determined by what's in the judge's heart. Sotomayor was having none of that mushy stuff. "It's not what's in the heart that compels conclusions in cases. It's the law," she said briskly. Kyl drilled down: Wasn't it really her emotions that guide her decision-making? (Read: isn't that how all women operate?)
-
Sonia Knows Nunchucks
Our friends at TheUptake took the liberty of spicing up Sotomayor’s exchange with Utah's Orrin Hatch.
-
Sen. Franken Flops at Sotomayor Hearings
Al Franken lost the funny when he won a seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Watch the video.
-
Pride and Prejudice
Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing gets off to a condescending start.
The exchange set a pattern—Republicans would accuse Sotomayor of being a soft-hearted minority, and she would parry with examples from her 17-year judicial career where she'd been as mean or meaner than any white guy on the bench. And the Democratic senators were very eager to reinforce that point. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) summarized a long list of awful cases where she'd ruled against, for instance, the victims of discrimination, or plane crashes. His point: Sotomayor may be a Latina from the Bronx, but her decisions will look just like Alito's! Dios mio.
There was also a lot of deference on display—deference by Sotomayor, that is. She deferred to Congress on regulatory matters; deferred to her colleagues on cameras in the court (though she did say she would to try to persuade them to give it a shot!). She deferred to precedent, and no doubt biting her tongue, she deferred to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who dressed her down for daring to express an opinion in an extracurricular speech and for bullying male lawyers in her courtroom.
Graham's cross-exam was downright nasty (I take back what I said yesterday about his Southern manners.) At one point, he cattily instructed Sotomayor, "Don't become a speechwriter if this law thing doesn’t work out." Later, he said, 'I like you, for whatever that matters"— then called her a bully and quoted unflattering comments about her from anonymous lawyers. Sotomayor offered that the complaints may have been made by attorneys who found the Second Circuit's unique procedural rules difficult and challenging. Graham shot back, "Lawyers find you difficult and challenging. Do you think you have a temperament problem?" His unsolicited advice: "Maybe these hearings are a time for self-reflection." It’s hard to imagine a senator being so thoroughly patronizing to Roberts or Alito.
The most entertaining part of the hearing came when Sotomayor displayed a surprising familiarity with nunchucks. (Bonus video here.) But in an eight hour-hearing, she only made one genuinely candid comment. When Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wisc.) asked whether her vaunted empathy would apply to the Brewers' fans in his state and to rural folk, Sotomayor replied, charmingly, that she travels to all kinds of places, even the "mountains," and when she does she always tries to crash with friends—not to save money, but to soak up the local culture.
Sotomayor's couch-surfing confession provided the hearing's only glimpse so far of the humanity we've heard so much about in media reports and speeches. I'd like to see a little more of this side of her. It's obvious that she knows the law and that she's smart. But so far—perhaps on her guard after the "wise Latina" kerfuffle—she's been all business, even dour. At one point, she remarked, 'We’re not robots." She could have fooled me.
Page 1 of 1 
So let me get this straight:
So let me get this straight: You start your thesis off by longing for the days when would be justices gave straight answers but then spend the rest of your column excoriating those nasty white guys- read Republican men-for asking anything that might give a broader view of who she really is.
Doesn't that sort of contradict your opening argument and make the rest of what you wrote a cliche of what has been written elsewhere, and better, by others?
I think this sums it up:
I think this sums it up:
"It’s hard to imagine a senator being so thoroughly patronizing to Roberts or Alito."
It's not a matter of tough questions, it's a matter of the misogynistic Republican males being patronizing and downright ugly to Sotomayor in a way that they would not have been to a white male candidate. Especially a hard-core conservative one.
All these comments sound like they were made by white male Republican trolls. I liked the article and it's tongue-in-cheek humor actually better than I like Sotomayor, whom I fear is going to be more conservative than Souter.
Bill Maher put it best when
Bill Maher put it best when referring to the hearings on Chris Matthews’s Hardball on Tuesday when he said; “All these white people, especially these white men who are so incensed about reverse racism and Sotomayor. Because the problem (Chris) is for too long Puerto Rican women have had their boots on the necks of white men in America; and this must stop."
Lightweight
She clearly is an intellectual lightweight and a perfect example of what one gets when affirmative action is used. Nevertheless, she is apparently smart enough to realize (or more likely, someone pointed out to her) that Ogabe's desire to have a judge with empathy is a non-starter when selecting a Supreme Court Justice - because the justice's only charter is to determine the Constitutionality of laws passed by government.
How trite of you...
I don't care so much for the fragmented perspectives of that article. I think the writer perhaps mistepped. Even the title-- "Where did Sotomayor's Empathy Go?" Really? I'm so glad it was no where in sight yesterday at her hearings. I wonder how this article would have read should the subject had been someone of empathies totally unrelated to those of the writer. Upset because there wasn't more "couch-surfing" talk? The hearings were not a profile in Parade or Good House Keeping. I don't want to know the personal side or the soft side of this woman! I want to know that she is astute, grounded, well-read, well-thought, well-educated, and focused! And I'm sorry if the writer of this article wasn't entertained as much as she would have liked, but I feel that the sober proceedings yesterday deserved much better credit and representation than what Mother Jones has given them. Shame on you!
"She deferred to Congress on
"She deferred to Congress on regulatory matters; deferred to her colleagues on I take back what I cameras in the court (though she did say she would to try to persuade them to give it a shot!)."
What the heck does that construction even mean?
I seriously wonder....
... just how much damage can be done and how much credibility can be lost from a website like Mother Jones by one single article?
i think a point this article
i think a point this article is making is that sure, we want judges to give us straight answers. certainly there has been a lack of that in the recent past. however, when a latina woman is being nominated to the bench, she cannot be honest. she has to play to the machismo that is so present in politics. she has to prove that, although she is a woman, she can still be very masculine.
also, i'm very surprised how many unintelligent comments are posted on a mother jones article.
How about a challenging question
White or not, Republican or not, Lindsey Graham at least asked pointed questions with good follow-up questions. Most of the other interlocutors, in fear of insulting the ever growning Latina-Hispanic voting block, were merely asking gift questions designed to make Sotomayor look good. Only when answering Graham's questions did we get to see the real Sonia. He was certainly accurate when stating she is an awful speech writer. Yet, he stated that that he probably would be voting on her appoinment and admitted that she very likely would be approved. He was refreshing. All the other interlocutors were hum-drum boring and Sotomayor was hum-drum droning in her responses.
I don't want to be a judge
I'm glad I'm not a judge.
Evevn though I have some of the Magyar's "whiteness" , I am prejudiced against the
"necktie" guys because of so may of them it can be said, "He was not born. He was issued.".
Judge Sotomayor
It’s a sad day in America when someone can make the kind of comments this woman has made numerous times, and still be in the running for a seat on the US Supreme Court. Use your vivid imagination for a minute, and try to envision a white male nominee for the Supreme Court saying this:
‘I would hope that a wise white man with the richness of his experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a Latina female who hasn't lived that life.’
He’d be tossed out on his ear, and everyone knows it.
The principles of logic and humanity that support the Civil Rights Act of 1964 transcend race as well as gender, and it’s way past time for ALL plural standards to go the way of the hood and the burning cross.
In addition to that, as a lifelong Democrat: I want my party back! The Democrats have been virtually dysfunctional for several decades, living on the same brand of pandering that Ms. Sotomayor practices on a routine basis. I believe we can do a whole lot better.
White men have far worse
White men have far worse over the years, and still manage to hold power. Bottom line on this is, She is Obamas Pick, So she could be a law genious, and people will still find fault with her. I don't see whats the big deal with what she said. Our experiances in life do direct how we look at the world. I think you need that when judging cases. All to often we see people making judgment calls on things they no nothing about, espaecally in matters involving race. Lets face it there is more than one or two Americas, you race, gender, socio-economic status, and history, sculpts how you view America. We can't have Just tthe "White " view of law direct us thur this minefield we call the American population.
Context and Perspective
What's happening to Mother Jones? Seems to me that y'all are feeding right into the mainstream media frenzy surrounding Judge Sotomayor's nomination than presenting any thoughtful analysis of her as a nominee or the absurd TV/political circus that has become the shameful standard in the nomination process. I expect much more from you. I invite readers to view my own latest blog entry if you are looking for an alternative to the MJ "alternative" point of view. Current posting is titled "Lies, Damn Lies, and... Statistics?" http://nattererer.blogspot.com/2009/07/lies-damn-lies-and-statistics.htm...
cheap nike dunks
I think it's a good topic: cheap nike dunks,cheap jordan shoes
The exchange set a
The exchange set a pattern—Republicans would accuse Sotomayor of being a soft-hearted minority, and she would parry with examples from her 17-year judicial career where she'd been as mean or meaner than any white guy on the bench. estetik And the Democratic senators were very eager to reinforce that point. burun estetiği ameliyatları Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) summarized a long list of awful cases where she'd ruled against, for instance, the victims of discrimination, or plane crashes. göğüs büyütme ameliyatları His point: Sotomayor may be a Latina from the Bronx, but her decisions will look just like Alito's! Dios mio. göğüs estetiği There was also a lot of deference on display—deference by Sotomayor, that is. göğüs küçültme ameliyatları She deferred to Congress on regulatory matters; deferred to her colleagues on cameras in the court (though she did say she would to try to persuade them to give it a shot! karın germe estetiği). She deferred to precedent, and no doubt biting her tongue, she deferred to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC vajina estetiği), who dressed her down for daring to express an opinion in an extracurricular speech and for bullying male lawyers in her courtroom. lazer epilasyon Graham's cross-exam was downright nasty (I take back what I said yesterday about his Southern manners. karın estetiği ameliyatları) At one point, he cattily instructed Sotomayor, "Don't become a speechwriter if this law thing doesn’t work out. estetik cerrahi" Later, he said, 'I like you, for whatever that matters saç ekimi"— then called her a bully and quoted unflattering comments about her from anonymous lawyers. yağ aldırma ameliyatı Sotomayor offered that the complaints may have been made by attorneys who found the Second Circuit's unique procedural rules difficult and challenging. nazmi bayçın Graham shot back, "Lawyers find you difficult and challenging. nazmi bayçın Do you think you have a temperament problem? nazmi bayçın " His unsolicited advice: "Maybe these hearings are a time for self-reflection.nazmi bayçın " It’s hard to imagine a senator being so thoroughly patronizing to Roberts or Alito. jinekomasti The most entertaining part of the hearing came when Sotomayor displayed a surprising familiarity with nunchucks. nazmi bayçın (Bonus video here.) But in an eight hour-hearing, she only made one genuinely candid comment. When Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wisc. nazmi bayçın) asked whether her vaunted empathy would apply to the Brewers' fans in his stat e and to rural folk, Sotomayor replied, charmingly göğüs küçültme estetiği, that she travels to all kinds of places, even the "mountains," and when she does she always tries to crash with friends—not to save money, but to soak up the local culture. nazmi bayçın Sotomayor's couch-surfing confession provided the hearing's only glimpse so far of the humanity we've heard so much about in media reports and speeches. nazmi bayçın I'd like to see a little more of this side of her. göğüs toparlama estetiği It's obvious that she knows the law and that she's smart. But so far—perhaps on her guard after the "wise Latina" kerfuffle—she's been all business, even dour. nazmi bayçın At one point, she remarked, 'We’re not robots." She could have fooled me. göğüs büyütme estetiği
