Posted on 05/06/2009 7:14:49 AM PDT by La Lydia
President Obama's first selection of a Supreme Court justice is being managed by a small group of senior advisers, and the process will last at least into next week before producing a candidate who the administration hopes will inject real-world experience into the nation's highest court.... The advisers are gathering recommendations from congressional leaders and determining what criteria will count most in narrowing the field of candidates to replace Justice David H. Souter...(Obama) has indicated that he wants a candidate who has a less traditional résumé, in order to bring diversity to a high court now filled entirely by former appellate court judges. As White House press secretary Robert Gibbs put it, Obama is looking for "somebody who understands how being a judge affects Americans' everyday lives."
Congressional conservatives have reacted anxiously to that qualification, fearing that it means a nominee who is more interested in making the law than in interpreting it.
One possible candidate for the seat, Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, appeared to walk close to that line in a video that emerged yesterday. Sotomayor would be the first Latino and the third woman to serve on the high court.
Speaking at Duke University in 2005, Sotomayor said, "All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for people with court of appeals experience" because "the court of appeals is where policy is made."
She then sought to soften the statement, adding lightly, "I know this is on tape and I should never say that, because we don't make law, I know. Um, okay. I know. I'm not promoting it, I'm not advocating it." The audience laughed as she brushed off the statement, perhaps sarcastically.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
And BS. They knew months ago who they want. And they will probably get 3.
"Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know - and I know - this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law - I know - [audience laughter]. Okay, I know, I know [responding to audience laughter - wink and a nod] . I'm not promoting it and I'm not advocating it [more audience laughter]. Okay. Umm [lots more insider audience laughter]"
“Bring diversity to a high court now filled entirely by former appellate court judges” just means that experience does not count and may be held against you.
Just what we need, another incompetent 0 appointee.
No One will pay attention.
I say again....Megan Kelly of Fox should be on the Supreme Court. But.........we know that ain’t going to happen....she’s too honest.
Yes. But who knows how they are gonna be once they get the power? Look at Souter and Kennedy....
Ya, right. And his “small, seasoned” group has done so well with the economy and fascism that I can’t see what sort of Left-wing flamer they come up with here.
If appearing stupid is a prerequisite for being 'Bam's pick, she has the job nailed.
I guess we could say that about anyone. You gotta take your best shot and hope for the best. But.....as the saying goes....”If a deal starts out bad, it will end up bad.”
Especially with a job for life mentality.
She is, in effect, scoffing at the Constitution and the legislative branch, as were they all.
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.