Judge frustrates senators

July 16, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
It’s times like a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing that really drive home the differences between how the general public and judges think, especially on hot-button issues like abortion and gun rights.

I found a few quotes from U.S. Supreme Court nominee 2nd Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor worth highlighting.

Senators questioned her on the topics mentioned above, to which the judge failed to give the answers the senators wanted to hear. According to a CNN.com article, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK, was frustrated by Judge Sotomayor’s responses saying she’d need specifics of a particular case before giving her opinion about whether someone has a fundamental right to own a gun or whether certain abortions would be legal.

“What we do is different than the conversations citizens have about what they want the law to do,” the judge said, noting judges have to look at the facts and apply the law based on those facts. “It’s not that we make a broad policy choice and say this is what we want.”

This is something I think most of the general public, and apparently politicians, don’t understand when dealing with judges. They are selected (or elected) to uphold and interpret the law, not to interject their personal beliefs into the law.

A judge may believe abortion should be illegal or all guns should be outlawed, but as Judge Sotomayor stated, judges have to consider the facts of the case and the applicable laws to make a decision. Of course, the politicians who oppose her nomination would love for her to respond to the questions with answers they don’t like so they can jump all over her and use it to vote against her.
ADVERTISEMENT

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. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  2. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

  3. This outbreak illustrates the absurdity of the extreme positions taken by today's liberalism, specifically individualism and the modern cult of endless personal "freedom." Ebola reminds us that at some point the person's own "freedom" to do this and that comes into contact with the needs of the common good and "freedom" must be curtailed. This is not rocket science, except, today there is nonstop propaganda elevating individual preferences over the common good, so some pundits have a hard time fathoming the obvious necessity of quarantine in some situations....or even NATIONAL BORDERS...propagandists have also amazingly used this as another chance to accuse Western nations of "racism" which is preposterous and offensive. So one the one hand the idolatry of individualism has to stop and on the other hand facts people don't like that intersect with race-- remain facts nonetheless. People who respond to facts over propaganda do better in the long run. We call it Truth. Sometimes it seems hard to find.

  4. It would be hard not to feel the Kramers' anguish. But Catholic Charities, by definition, performed due diligence and held to the statutory standard of care. No good can come from punishing them for doing their duty. Should Indiana wish to change its laws regarding adoption agreements and or putative fathers, the place for that is the legislature and can only apply to future cases. We do not apply new laws to past actions, as the Kramers seem intent on doing, to no helpful end.

  5. I am saddened to hear about the loss of Zeff Weiss. He was an outstanding member of the Indianapolis legal community. My thoughts are with his family.

ADVERTISEMENT