The author expresses her own opinions, not necessarily those of The New Agenda.

Sonia Sotomayor’s journey towards becoming a Supreme Court Justice continues.  As with all nominees for the Supreme Court before her, Sotomayor’s involvement in different organizations has been scrutinized.  Most recently her previous involvement as a board member for the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, or PRLDEF, has come under the microscope.

The LatinoJustice PRLDEF states that it:

champions an equitable society.  Using the power of the law together with advocacy and education, LatinoJustice PRLDEF protects opportunities for all Latinos to succeed in school and work, fulfill their dreams, and sustain their families and communities.

Why are politicians finding fault with this?  Apparently PRLDEF officially opposed the seating of conservative Robert Bork on the bench in the late 1980s.  The paperwork turned over by PRLDEF says very little about her personal involvement in taking this stance against Bork.

Sotomayor has already resigned from Belizean Grove, a women’s club, who according to their website make up a

…constellation of influential women who are key decision makers in the profit, non-profit and social sectors; who build long term mutually beneficial relationships in order to both take charge of their own destinies and help others do the same…The Grove is an international nurturing network that helps women pursue more significant dreams, ambitions, purposes, transcendence and spiritual fulfillment while also opening up more leadership opportunities to these women of diverse backgrounds, talents, ages, and skills.

Sen. Cornyn and Judge Sotomayor

In her resignation, Sotomayor acknowledges that this organization did indeed give her “friendship, fellowship, and support,” yet  she resigned because she didn’t want her membership to become the focus of her confirmation hearings.

Her resignation on June 19, 2009 came a day after Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, questions whether Sotomayor intends to be a “Supreme Court justice for all of us, or just for some of us.”

Sorry, but what a ridiculous question.

If she ascends to the bench she will be a Supreme Court Justice for all of us.  Anyone that sits on the bench is a Supreme Court Justice for all of us, whether they are like us or not.  Justices do not select which cases they will or will not hear and make judgment on.  Should all of our white justices have recused themselves from hearing cases such as Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka or every male Justice have recused himself from hearing Roe v. Wade?  Of course not, otherwise there would have been anyone left to hear these cases.

Every jurist brings their background and unique perspective when they hear certain cases.  If this were not true we would not worry so much about whether or not nominees elected to the bench were conservative or liberal.  I personally feel more comfortable with someone on the bench that understands my position as a woman, and furthermore, as a Latina.

Savana Redding outside of the Supreme Court (above) and at the age at which she was strip searched (below).

Women do indeed bring a unique perspective to the legal decisions that they make.  Just take the recent case of Safford Unified School District v. Redding.  In this particular case the Supreme Court held that a strip search of a young girl violated the Fourth Amendment. 
Honestly, what business did school officials have looking in a little girl’s underwear for ibuprofen?  Students did not claim that she had heroin, cocaine, or some other highly illegal substance; she was accused of having medication that any kid could walk into a local convenience store and get on their own.  I’m sure that the majority of her classmates also had easy access to this medication at home.

The male Justices belittled the lasting effect that this search would have on Miss. Redding, but as Ginsburg pointed out to USA Today when asked about her colleagues’ comments during the arguments:  “They have never been a 13-year-old girl.  It’s a very sensitive age for a girl.  I didn’t think that my colleagues, some of them, quite understood.”

When you’re a 13-year-old girl, your body is just beginning to change.  You are in a transition period when you’re really not a little girl anymore, but you’re not a woman either.  I remember being embarrassed by the changes my body was going through.  When in the locker room changing for P.E. you come up with ways of changing without revealing too much.  I can’t imagine how I would have felt if I had been asked to pull aside my underwear to reveal myself to any adult.  I would have been embarrassed (though willing) to do so for a doctor if there was a medical need, but to do so in order to prove that I wasn’t hiding anything, well, that’s another story.

I think that Sonia Sotomayor will be a Justice for all of us, but she will bring a much needed perspective to the bench that hasn’t been seen before.  Why would anyone consider this a bad thing….unless they are afraid of people different from themselves?