Sexist Attacks on Sotomayor Begin
May 27, 2009
by Jill Tubman
|Cross-posted from Jack and Jill Politics. Jill is expressing her own opinions, not necessarily those of The New Agenda.
In the clip above, John King of CNN says:
Some are saying that she is not an intellectual firebrand, someone who could compete with Antonin Scalia or Justice Alito, the conservative brains, if you will, on the Supreme Court.
“Some“? Who are these some? CNN sadly goes on to say in another article:
But she has suffered through recent stinging criticism in the media and from blogs from both the left and right over perceived — some defenders say invented — concerns about her temperament and intellect.
Double eye-roll — look, Girlfriend graduated summa cum laude from Princeton, has Phi Beta Kappa on her rez, and was editor of the Yale Law Journal just like President Obama. Wanna bet the guy impugning her credz couldn’t compete himself? No one gives you summa cum laude — you earn it. She’s plenty smart enough for the likes of Scalia and Alito. Folks need to leave Sotomayor alone — she may look sweet, but you don’t get out of the South Bronx and through Princeton and Yale Law without being tougher and smarter than any of the usual talking heads can imagine. OK?
Those who question Sotomayor’s intellectualism in the face of her overwhelming intellectual achievements and who wonder if she’s tough enough to take on a couple of smart white guys are exhibiting racism, sexism — or both. Like she ain’t had to smack down countless Scalias & Alitos before on the way up. By now, she can eat a Scalia for breakfast and snack on an Alito for lunch.
Bitchez, please.
Do you expect the suggestion to be made or raised in a straightforward way, or that she is not, she does not have the judicial muscle, the temprament to handle this job? That she’s not smart enough to handle this job, let me just be blunt with it.
Since when are SC Justices in competition with each other? I’ve never seen the Court as being an arena of conflict. “..if she is tough enough to take on a couple of smart white guys.” What is this supposed mean and Is bitchez slang for bitches?
By now, she can eat a Scalia for
breakfast and snack on an Alito for lunch.
Not if she wants to worry asbout her arteries. Neocons are high in cholesterol.
goesh, justices are seen to be in competition with one another constantly; that’s why people worry so much about which preznit gest to nominate which justice. Because we all know that a lib will balance out a neocon and whatnot. And like Ginsberg, Sotomayor knows what it’s like to have to shove REALLY HARD in the opposite direction from a bunch of other guys who haven’t got a clue what they’re selling.
Read a few dissenting opinions and some contentious decisions if you want to be disabusd of the notion that the supreme court is a non-partisan lovefest.
The criticisms are flying … from both Left and Right. Noone seems to know how to pigeonhole Judge Sotomayor. That’s good.
Is she smart??? IS SHE SMART??? Yep. Smart enough not to pass any side’s litmus test.
I am behind this woman 100%!
She clearly as the scholastic credentials and jurisprudential resume to be on the bench. From my readings the court is more collegiate than confrontation, academic rather than bear knuckles. By all accounts Scalia and Ginsburg and their families are vary close even taking vacations together. Rhenquist and i think Beyer shared basketball, played on a team together and attended many games, collegiate and pro together. Soueter was a loner, Sotomayer will not be a Souter.
Collegial doesn’t mean non-competitive or non-confrontational. They just keep their confrontations to the workplace. Which honestly, is all anyone who isn’t invited to the company picnics cares about.
At least three top Republicans — McConnell, Cornyn and Hatch — have described her as being likely to judge based on “feelings.” Other stories noted that “some” also raised such concerns. The exact same wording.
If feelings are a problem, why don’t they just nominate computers for Christ’s sake?
But then we wouldn’t be able to make legal judgments on the basis of disgust, like Leon Kass advocates. Of course, that’s different; it’s not like being grossed out is an irrational female emotion or anything!
I’ve come across serveral references in law blogs that she has a 60% reversal rate when her rulings have gone before the SC. that does not bode well for her.
The SC cannot be competetive because there is no final authority beyond their own. Taken in the context of ‘eating one for breakfast’, the author clearly sees the SC internal process as confrontational and puts black letter law , precedent and tradition on the back burner and differing Judicial opinions become a contest and conflict of personalities. There is nothing to bear this out. As such, her race ,gender and personal history becomes equal to her judicial experience and ability, which I might ad is considerable and should be the only consideration since there are only 9 of them, appointed for life.
I think SC nominations should be done on a rotating basis by the 2 main political parties, where they have interviews and vote in the House and Senate. The DNC gets one, then the GOP gets one and gender parity should be mandated. If for instance the GOP in their turn selects a man, the next time it must be a woman and visa-versa. I would like to see term limits too, say 10 years.
“a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” A wise Latina, like a wise WASP male, understands she has no monopoly on rich experiences or vital truths. She values what her life has offered without letting herself be constrained by it. If she’s a judge, she recognizes her obligation to strive for impartiality, if she is not and she is on Supreme Court- a court from which there is no appeal , we will all suffer.
bruce nahin:
“A wise Latina, like a wise WASP male, understands she has no monopoly on rich experiences or vital truths.” I agree with your assessment.
Over the course of my life I have known a number of “Latina” women and a number of “WASP males”. My personal experience is that “Latina” women are more likely to recognize that they have no monopoly on rich experiences or vital truths than “WASP males” are likely to.
I did some research about her comment:Her “wise Latina” comment came as a rejection of Justice O’Connor’s claim that a wise man and a wise woman would come to the same conclusion on a question of interpreting the law. Sotomayor was explicitly rejecting the idea of objective, impartial justice. Hers is a radical view of the role of a jurist, and she must be pressed on it in her hearings; not in any hope that she will fail to be confirmed( because I do support her for reasons I’ve enumerated elsewhere on this blog), but so that her biases and radicalism (and those of the man who nominated her) will be made explicit for the country to see and to judge.
[...] language at its finest. I know I’m not the only one who has noticed this emerging trend (read here and here). Keep an eye out for continued sexism surrounding Sotomayor’s nomination and [...]
The Federal Judiciary is made up of political appointees that are charged with interpreting the Constitution (a political document) and the published laws (written by the legislature through a political process and signed by the Chief Executive, a political position) by exercising their professional judgment. The Federal Judiciary is inherently and intentionally political in nature.
Hopefully, this supremely qualified woman, Judge Sotomayor, will be confirmed and sit on the Supreme Court. I also hope that her biases are equal to Antony Scalia’s biases and that she provides some needed balance.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...