Empathy, Sotomayor, Ricci and The Constitution
We've been hearing a lot about empathy lately, since Barack Obama appointed Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. We've also heard about Hispanics needing representation on the Supreme Court so Judge Sotomayor should be confirmed by the Senate post haste. Let's just slow down a moment, shall we?
I'll be blunt. Empathy for certain groups of people over others has no place on any court in these United States of America. It is illegitimate, improper and is disqualifying for a seat on the highest Court in the land. If nothing else, Sotomayor should be quietly returned to her seat on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. In saner times, her continued service on the bench would be rigorously questioned after the statements have come to light concerning her beliefs about wise Latina women being better judges than white men.
This dovetails nicely with the idea that Hispanics need representation on the Supreme Court. This is assinine at best. The Supreme Court of the United States is not a representative body. The goal of the president and the Senate is to confirm someone whose credentials are above reproach, whose legal skills are the finest in our nation, whose temperament is reflective of the highest traditions in the Court's history, and whose judicial philosophy reflects the proper role of the judiciary in a representative republic governed by our Constitution. It is not to play identity politics or advance an affirmative action candidate. I should say here that I don't believe Sotomayor to be such a candidate, though she herself has called herself a perfect affirmative action baby. Sotomayor has remarkable accomplishments in both education and career, and viewed through that lens she is qualified to sit on the Court. It is upon the points of judicial philosophy and empathy on which the foundation exists to reject her appointment to the Supreme Court.
Take the case decided yesterday, Ricci v. DeStefano. Frank Ricci was discriminated against on the basis of his race. That he happens to be white is irrelevant to the protections granted under the 9th and 14th Amendments and Title VII of the Civil Rights Code of 1964, amended in 1991. Sotomayor's 2nd Circuit Court rejected Ricci's claims out of hand and without comment. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court wisely rejected the dubious claim that a white person cannot be discriminated against on the basis of race, and all 9 justices rebuked the Sotomayor-led 2nd Circuit for refusing to hear the case on its merits. Considering the ideological makeup of the Court, this last point was surprising to say the least.
One is then required to ask: "Just exactly what groups pass the empathy test that Judge Sotomayor requires?" Certainly it wasn't the 17 white firefighters who passed their promotion tests but were denied said promotion because no blacks passed the test. It certainly wasn't the 2 Hispanic firefights who also passed. One must wonder who, exactly, benefits from the race and identity politics espoused by Judge Sotomayor. If the firefighters were female would they have received her empathy? And what of the Constitution and the statues at hand? Should we adhere to Chief Justice Roberts' view that judges are umpires who call balls and strikes as the rules are written, leaving the crafting of the rulebook to the legislature? Or should we adopt Barack Obama and Judge Sotomayor's view of judging, in which certain favored groups go to the head of the class at the expense of other people, duly enacted statutes, the Constitution, and the entire concept of the rule of law?
In point of fact, we are all represented equally by judges and justices who apply the law evenly, taking great care to abide by the example set forth by Lady Justice, who while holding the scales of justice wears a blindfold to ensure that the law is applied evenly, without bias. It shouldn't matter if the judge before you is white, black, Asian, Hispanic, Catholic, Jewish, etc. If the judge is committed to equal justice under the law, then we are all properly represented by the Court; it is this fidelity to the law and the Constitution that makes a fine justice, and not the color of their skin or religious background. Would that our president and our friends on the Left be wise enough to see things the same way.
I'll be blunt. Empathy for certain groups of people over others has no place on any court in these United States of America. It is illegitimate, improper and is disqualifying for a seat on the highest Court in the land. If nothing else, Sotomayor should be quietly returned to her seat on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. In saner times, her continued service on the bench would be rigorously questioned after the statements have come to light concerning her beliefs about wise Latina women being better judges than white men.
This dovetails nicely with the idea that Hispanics need representation on the Supreme Court. This is assinine at best. The Supreme Court of the United States is not a representative body. The goal of the president and the Senate is to confirm someone whose credentials are above reproach, whose legal skills are the finest in our nation, whose temperament is reflective of the highest traditions in the Court's history, and whose judicial philosophy reflects the proper role of the judiciary in a representative republic governed by our Constitution. It is not to play identity politics or advance an affirmative action candidate. I should say here that I don't believe Sotomayor to be such a candidate, though she herself has called herself a perfect affirmative action baby. Sotomayor has remarkable accomplishments in both education and career, and viewed through that lens she is qualified to sit on the Court. It is upon the points of judicial philosophy and empathy on which the foundation exists to reject her appointment to the Supreme Court.
Take the case decided yesterday, Ricci v. DeStefano. Frank Ricci was discriminated against on the basis of his race. That he happens to be white is irrelevant to the protections granted under the 9th and 14th Amendments and Title VII of the Civil Rights Code of 1964, amended in 1991. Sotomayor's 2nd Circuit Court rejected Ricci's claims out of hand and without comment. In a 5-4 ruling, the Court wisely rejected the dubious claim that a white person cannot be discriminated against on the basis of race, and all 9 justices rebuked the Sotomayor-led 2nd Circuit for refusing to hear the case on its merits. Considering the ideological makeup of the Court, this last point was surprising to say the least.
One is then required to ask: "Just exactly what groups pass the empathy test that Judge Sotomayor requires?" Certainly it wasn't the 17 white firefighters who passed their promotion tests but were denied said promotion because no blacks passed the test. It certainly wasn't the 2 Hispanic firefights who also passed. One must wonder who, exactly, benefits from the race and identity politics espoused by Judge Sotomayor. If the firefighters were female would they have received her empathy? And what of the Constitution and the statues at hand? Should we adhere to Chief Justice Roberts' view that judges are umpires who call balls and strikes as the rules are written, leaving the crafting of the rulebook to the legislature? Or should we adopt Barack Obama and Judge Sotomayor's view of judging, in which certain favored groups go to the head of the class at the expense of other people, duly enacted statutes, the Constitution, and the entire concept of the rule of law?
In point of fact, we are all represented equally by judges and justices who apply the law evenly, taking great care to abide by the example set forth by Lady Justice, who while holding the scales of justice wears a blindfold to ensure that the law is applied evenly, without bias. It shouldn't matter if the judge before you is white, black, Asian, Hispanic, Catholic, Jewish, etc. If the judge is committed to equal justice under the law, then we are all properly represented by the Court; it is this fidelity to the law and the Constitution that makes a fine justice, and not the color of their skin or religious background. Would that our president and our friends on the Left be wise enough to see things the same way.
posted by The Rock | 3:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home