Nominee may be a first

May 26, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
President Barack Obama has chosen who he thinks is the right person for the U.S. Supreme Court: 2nd District Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Baseball fans may recognize her name because she was the District judge who issued the injunction against Major League Baseball owners, effectively ending the baseball strike that led to the cancellation of the World Series in 1994.

What is more noteworthy than her being the person who saved baseball is that if confirmed, she’d be the first Hispanic to take the bench on the nation’s highest court.

What strikes me about Judge Sotomayor is her sort of “rags to riches” story. Her background is one that many Americans can relate to, even if they didn’t attend prestigious Ivy League schools for undergraduate and law studies.

The judge’s Puerto Rican parents came to New York during World War II; her father died when she was nine, leaving her mother to raise her and her brother alone. Judge Sotomayor received a scholarship to Princeton University for her undergraduate degree and then earned her J.D. from Yale Law School.

In his remarks about Judge Sotomayor, Obama said he selected her not only for her intellect and recognition of the limits of the judicial role, but also for her life experience. The judge would bring more judicial experience and a varied experience than anyone currently serving on the Supreme Court when they were appointed. The president also noted she would replace Justice David Souter as the only justice with experience as a trial judge.

What do you think of Judge Sotomayor for the Supreme Court? What are the chances she’ll be confirmed and if so, how will she affect the court?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • She is very likely to be confirmed unless there is a smoking gun discovered which causes her to lose support.

    Her confirmation is not likely to change the Supreme Court very much as she is replacing David Souter who has been a solid liberal vote for many years.

    She would not be the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court -- Benjamin Cardozo was -- a descendant of Portuguese (also Hispanic).

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT