Thursday, August 6, 2009
Today, despite the efforts of about 30 Republicans, Sonia Sotomayor was confirmed as the newest member of the US Supreme Court and also as its first member of Latino descent. All the Democrats, that I am aware of right now anyway, voted in favor of her as did a number of Republicans who were smart enough to read the writing on the wall.
I can't remember the last time a Justice was unanimously confirmed. It was before I paid attention to this things at least. So it doesn't surprise me that people voted against her. People voted against Roberts and Alito as well, and in some cases for equally stupid reasons. Nevertheless, I'm not interested in "what goes around comes around," or "what's good for the goose is fucking hilarious to do to the gander." I don't take issue with voting against a Supreme Court nominee with good reason or even based on worries that the nominee may be some sort of wacko hyperpolitical sleeper agent for one or the other political fringe group. But the reasoning behind voting against Sotomayor was in a lot of cases idiotic and reeked of sexism and racism.
I'm happy to see that some common sense remains in the GOP, which apparently stands for Galdarn Opposition Party now. But the criticisms...Mitch McConnell questioned what would happen if Sotomayor gave into her "impulses" while on the court. What, because she's on her period? Or just because Hispanic women tend to have attitude problems? I don't think we questioned if Alito would get mixed up in La Cosa Nostra or if Clarence Thomas was going to bring a ghetto blaster into court. But I guess being a double minority makes you fair game for moronic interpretation.
The criticism when not based on thinly veiled stereotyping was still lacking in accuracy. Sotomayor's record on things like gun rights was questioned. Problem is, none of these dissenters seem to understand the concept of legal precedent, which basically means Judge Sotomayor does not have the freedom to willy nilly overturn Supreme Court decisions just because she doesn't agree with them. If Sotomayor had ruled the other way in the case in question, that would have been grounds to question her effectiveness as a potential Justice. And of course the case of the white firemen which drew the original "reverse racist" comments from various bullshit outlets; again, a matter of precedent.
Sotomayor received criticisms for doing her job properly and was looked down upon for judging traits that are considered virtues among white males: being tough, asking questions, etc. In other words, exactly the kinds of things you want a Justice on the highest court in the land to do. Thankfully, common sense prevailed, not that the GOP had the manpower to stop it anyway. Or at the very least, a few Republicans remembered who a lot of their voters were and how it was going to look if they made the wrong choice. Sphere: Related Content