Sonia Sotomayor–Her Racist Remarks

» Posted by on May 29, 2009 in Politics | 0 comments

Ok,  I held off as long as I could before I joined in the fray about BO’s nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States.  The media is orgasmic (as usual) about her humble beginnings as a Puerto Rican immigrant growing up in Brooklyn NY. How sweet.  And don’t forget she has diabetes and will show empathy.  A woman of “color” has finally been nominated which just makes me want to weep with joy.  Never mind that the media virtually ignores her judicial qualifications (or lack thereof).  The NY Times endorsement never once mentioned a specific ruling she was involved in but referred to her humble beginnings and ability to show empathy all throughout the article.

She should be disqualified to sit on the highest court in the land.

She has made racist remarks and engaged in reverse discrimination.  Could any white male get away with saying that white males could come to a better decision as a judge compared to a Latina woman?  Can you imagine the outrage and cries of racism?  Well this is in fact what she said.

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,” she said in 2001.

In addition, she has upheld a lower court decision Ricci vs Destefano which is clearly an example of reverse discrimination.  Read about the case and see for yourself.  It’s being reviewed by the Supreme Court this year and will likely be overturned.

When a supreme court justice is sworn in, they take the following oath:

“I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich. . . . So help me God.”

Does this sound anything like “empathy?”  What about just following the law and administering justice based on the constitution?  How much longer are we going to divide people into groups of different colors, sexual orientation, and special interests?  This has no place in the Supreme Court.

Charles Krauthammer in today’s Washington Post summed this up pretty well.

Submit a Comment