Posted on 04/25/2012 6:16:51 PM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts
(Reuters) - The Supreme Court was deep into arguments over Arizona's new immigration law on Wednesday when the high court's first Hispanic justice focused on how difficult it could be for police officers to determine whether someone they stop is in the United States legally.
"What information does your (federal) system have?" Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli as she methodically extracted a core element of the Obama administration's case against the state of Arizona.
"How does that database tell you that someone is illegal as opposed to a citizen?" asked Sotomayor, 57, born in the Bronx to parents who had migrated from Puerto Rico. "Today, if you use the names Sonia Sotomayor, they would probably figure out I was a citizen. But let's assume it's John Doe, who lives in Grand Rapids. ... Is there a citizen database?"
Puerto Ricans have for nearly a century been U.S. citizens, so Sotomayor's family did not face the dilemmas of many other Hispanics who moved to the United States. Yet Sotomayor, who grew up in a housing project and went to Princeton and Yale on scholarships, has referred to the sting of discrimination and feeling "different" among people from elite backgrounds.
Verrilli told her that while many federal databases exist, including one listing U.S. passport holders, there is no citizenship database. "So you have lots of circumstances in which people who are citizens are going to come up (with) no match," he added.
On Wednesday, as Sotomayor, who joined the court in 2009, heard her first major immigration case, she vigorously questioned both sides. She showed a particular concern for the plight of people who might be detained by police based on their race or ethnicity.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
By now, I should have that on a cheat sheet, ready to copy-and-paste, given how I find myself quoting it so much since Election Day 2008 (the day all leftist racism ended, right?).
Has she written any opinions, either for the majority, concurring or dissenting? How did she come across in her writing? Questioning lawyers during oral argument means nothing.
I can name at least two databases that would verify or refute citizenship: The INS, which does make applicants citizens, and the local election boards, at which they can register to vote after proving their citizenship. There’s also birth certificates kept by local governments, and social security numbers.
Good points. Also, any citizen is either native born or naturalized. Native born has a birth certificate which they had to use to get enrolled in school.
Naturalized citizens have the paper work involved with that process.
I am so tired of red herring arguments, and everyone making up stuff to try and hide their true agenda.
I think of this quote from Julius Caesar:
“The evil that men do lives after them....”
A chilling quote. And so true.
“I know my driver’s license number by heart. Even if I forgot mine, I could identify myself and be on my way in minutes. They’d go back to their cruiser, pull up the information and my photo. End of story.”
Never thought of that. I have always had my DL with me, but you never know...Thanks, DOne.
Shouldn’t the title be ‘First LESBIAN Hispanic justuce..’?
That is either a lesbo or a dude.
I don’t consider anyone who is a democRAT to be an American.
We also now have Kagan -the 'First LESBIAN HUMAN TOILET'!
Maybe it will help some time. If you need it, I hope so.
Thanks for making my point. Guess I should have said the Republicans "rubber-stamp" nominees. The Dims fight. Of course it takes a 60% Senate to fillibuster, but when the Repubbies have had it, they rarely used it. Go along to get along is their wimp political mentality. I believe that the Pubbies are still scared from the clinton/newt economic fights that shut down the fedgov (which I loved) back in the 90's. Clinton was able to successfully blame it on the Republican House, even though we all knew that it was Clinton who would not sign certain bills.
I don't think the GOP has ever recovered from that PR disaster that the Repubbies didn't fight. Women, children, homeless, and disabled were going to die in the streets was Clinton's and his Dim enablers' cry!
Obama has learned well from Billy "stained dress" Clinton. Class warfare works! I won't be surprised if that gets him 4 more years, even with our stagnant economy.
This nation has reached the tipping point because of too many "gimmes" wanting too much from the "producers". It's happening all over Europe and we're next in line.
Interesting you bring that up in this day of the Zimmerman/Martin issue. I've been thinking about producing some t-shirts with just that message. Sure some already exist with that wonderful saying, but I'm thinking something more patriotic that works with the current situation to remind the race-baiters how wrong they are.
Got graphic? Here's an idea: Cut the message to:
"THEY WILL NOT BE JUDGED BY THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN,
BUT BY THE CONTENT OF THEIR CHARACTER
That and an American flag lightly super-imposed over the words on the back of the shirt.
On the front upper left pocket corner:
Small flag above;
Underneath: MLK ... or not;
Underneath that: CHARACTER COUNTS
I'd be happy to contribute some small money and not profit a dime. These race-baiters need to be reminded what a great man (faults and all) once said. They quote him all the time, but have lost sight of his true meaning.
Check out: Cafepress.com where they could be sold. There are cheaper outlets on the Web.
How about “We all SHOULD BE Americans!”
What the hell does her being hispanic have to do with anything? It’s about the CONSTITUTION not race. We are (supposed to be) a nation of laws.
Of course the current administration is setting a bad example by ignoring the laws and it doesn’t seem like anyone in Congress gives a crap (with very few exceptions).
She had previously been a Republican appointee to the Federal Court. A Second Circuit Court of Appeals appoinment is not usually regarded as a "fast track" to the Supreme Court - certainly not anymore so than any other appeals court - and there is no factual basis that this judge in particular would be on a "fast track" for the Supreme Court to be appointed by someone more than a decade later to be a Supreme Court Justice that could not have been forseen as being President to make such an appointment at the time of Santorum's vote. Your argument simply does not make sense.
They may well have ... however, the quote is taken from Shakespeare's play commonly referred to as Julius Caesar , - Act 3, Scene 2 where it is near the beginning of Marc Antony's funeral oration beginning "Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears."
"The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones;"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.