[StBernard] Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor: You Read, You Decide

[Westley Annis]

Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor: 
You Read, You Decide 
by Newt Gingrich

Shortly after President Obama nominated her to a lifetime appointment to the
Supreme Court, I read Judge Sonia Sotomayor's now famous words:

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences
would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who
hasn't lived that life."

My initial reaction was strong and direct - perhaps too strong and too
direct. The sentiment struck me as racist and I said so. Since then, some
who want to have an open and honest consideration of Judge Sotomayor's
fitness to serve on the nation's highest court have been critical of my word
choice. 

With these critics who want to have an honest conversation, I agree. The
word "racist" should not have been applied to Judge Sotomayor as a person,
even if her words themselves are unacceptable (a fact which both President
Obama and his Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, have since admitted). 

So it is to her words - the ones quoted above and others - to which we
should turn, for they show that the issue here is not racial identity
politics. Sotomayor's words reveal a betrayal of a fundamental principle of
the American system - that everyone is equal before the law. 

The Central Question: Is American Justice No Longer Blindfolded?

The fundamental issue at stake in the Sotomayor discussion or nomination is
not her background or her gender but an issue that has implications far
beyond this judge and this nomination: Is judicial impartiality no longer a
quality we can and should demand from our Supreme Court Justices? 

President Obama apparently thinks so. Other presidents, Republican and
Democrat, have considered race and gender in making judicial appointments in
the past. But none have explicitly advocated the notion that judges should
substitute their personal experiences for impartiality in deciding cases.
And certainly none have asserted that their ethnicity, race or gender would
make them a better judge over a judge from a different background. 

Here is how President Obama explained his criteria for appointing judges
earlier this year:

"We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's
like to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it's like to
be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old - and that's the
criterion by which I'll be selecting my judges." 

No Group Has Benefited More From Impartial Justice Than the Less Fortunate

With these words, President Obama is cleverly inviting his critics to come
out swinging against empathy for the less fortunate among us. But Americans
are smarter than this. 

We understand that the job of a justice is to enforce the law, not the rule
of empathy. And we understand that when a judge substitutes his or her
personal experiences for the law, the law becomes what he or she wants it to
be, not what the people, through their elected representatives, have decided
it should be. 

Most tragically, it is this principle of judicial impartiality - of justice,
not just for the rich and the powerful, but for all - that has most
benefited the vulnerable and the downtrodden in America.

No group has needed or continues to need justice - that can't be
predetermined by wealth or privilege - as much as the less privileged.
President Obama doesn't seem to grasp that, by weakening judges' adherence
to the rule of law, he is also weakening the very foundation of equal
justice for the less fortunate Americans he wants to help. 

The "Court of Appeals is Where Policy Is Made"

How does Judge Sotomayor come down on the issue of a judge's fidelity to the
law?

Here is what she told
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109323:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040>  a Duke University Law School audience
in 2005 (emphasis mine): 

	"All of the legal defense funds out there, they're looking for
people with Court of Appeals experience. Because it is - Court of Appeals is
where policy is made. And I know, and I know, that this is on tape, and I
should never say that. Because we don't 'make law,' I know. [laughter] Okay,
I know. I know. I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it. I'm, you
know. [laughter] Having said that, the Court of Appeals is where, before the
Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating."


Is Judge Sotomayor Being Quoted Out of Context? You Read, You Decide

If Judge Sotomayor, by her own words, believes the judge's bench is "where
policy is made," what kind of law can we expect her to make as a Supreme
Court Justice?

The Berkeley Law School speech in which Judge Sotomayor made the comments
that I quoted at the outset of this newsletter - that a "wise Latina" would
make a better judge than a white male - has been widely cited. 

The White House is now claiming that critics are taking Judge Sotomayor's
comments in that speech out of context. So in the spirit of "you read, you
decide" I am linking here
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109324:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040>  to Judge Sotomayor's speech in full.

As you read it, see if you agree with those respected legal scholars who
have concluded that the speech as a whole isn't as damaging as the Judge's
"wise Latina" comment - it's worse
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109325:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . 

"Our Gender and National Origins May and 
Will Make a Difference in Our Judging"

Here are some excerpts from the speech (emphasis mine): 

*	"I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color
affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that."

*	"Whether born from experience or inherent psychological or cultural
differences...our gender and national origins may and will make a difference
in our judging."

*	"Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man
and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases....I
would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences
would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who
hasn't lived that life."


Again, you read, you decide. Read Judge Sotomayor's speech in full here
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109324:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . Then let me know what you think at
Newt.org
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109326:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . 

"Equal Justice Under Law" Is Chiseled in Stone on the Supreme Court

The central principle of American justice - and perhaps the single, great
idea of America - is equal justice before the law. 

This idea is expressed in the words "all men (and today we would say all men
and women) are created equal." It means that Americans stand before the law,
not as members of groups, but as individuals. 

"Equal justice under law" is in fact chiseled in stone on the front of the
Supreme Court building - and for good reason.

When a judge disregards the rule of law and applies a different standard to
certain groups - or, as the President would say, shows "empathy" - he or she
violates this central American principle. 

One Group's "Empathy" is Another Group's Injustice. Ask Frank Ricci.

When a judge views Americans as members of groups and not individuals, one
group's "empathy" becomes another group's injustice.

Nowhere is the injustice that results from judging Americans as members of
groups and not as individuals more evident than in Judge Sotomayor's ruling
in the case involving Frank Ricci, a New Haven, Conn., firefighter. 

Ricci quit his second job and studied 13 hours a day in 2003 for a civil
service exam he hoped would earn him a promotion to lieutenant in the New
Haven Fire Department. And when Ricci took the exam, all his hard work
seemed to pay off. He got one of the highest scores. But because no
African-Americans scored high enough on the exam to be promoted, the city of
New Haven threw out the results of the test and promoted no one.

Frank Ricci, 16 other white firefighters, and one Hispanic firefighter sued
the city, claiming they were denied promotions on the basis of their race. A
district judge dismissed the case, and a three- judge panel of the Second
Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal. One of those judges was
Judge Sotomayor. 

An Opportunity to Have a Debate About 
Equal Justice for Americans Like Frank Ricci

The Supreme Court is currently hearing the Ricci case, and a ruling is
expected next month, likely in the midst of hearings on Judge Sotomayor's
nomination.

Legal experts expect the Supreme Court to reverse Judge Sotomayor's ruling.
But however the high court rules, this is a moment for America to have a
full, honest and open debate, not just about the impartiality of our judges,
but about equal justice before the law for Americans like Frank Ricci. 

Which Judge Sotomayor Will Show Up on the Supreme Court?

In fairness to the judge, many of her rulings as a court of appeals judge do
not match the radicalism of her speeches and statements. She has shown more
caution and moderation in her rulings than in her words.

So the question we need to ask ourselves in considering Judge Sotomayor's
confirmation is this: Which judge will show up on the Supreme Court, the
radical from her speeches or the convention liberal from her rulings?

It's no small question. Judge Sotomayor is 54 years old. Supreme Court
Justice John Paul Stevens is 89. Judge Sotomayor has the potential to spend
more than 30 years on the Supreme Court. There, unlike on the court of
appeals, she will have no reason to show caution. On the high court, Judge
Sotomayor will not have to worry about a higher court overturning her
rulings. As a Supreme Court Justice, she will do the overturning.

The stakes are very high with this nomination. Has President Obama nominated
a conventionally liberal judge to a lifetime tenure on our highest court? Or
a radical liberal activist who will cast aside the rule of law in favor of
the narrow, divisive politics of race and gender identity?

Let me know what you think at Newt.org
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109326:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . 

You read, you decide. 


 	   Your friend,
   Newt Gingrich



Newt's Quick Links:


*	This Spring I taught a course at the University of Georgia School of
Law on the proper role of the judiciary in interpreting the Constitution.
It's especially relevant now with a confirmation hearing for the Supreme
Court approaching. The first two lectures from the class are posted at
newt.org/law
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109328:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . I encourage you to leave your
feedback. A short clip of one of the lectures on the duty of all three
branches to defend the constitution can be found here
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109329:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . 

*	My daughter, Jackie Gingrich Cushman, also takes up the question of
impartiality and the Sotomayor nomination this week in her weekly column at
townhall.com
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109330:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . The larger theme of her column is
learning every day, one of the five principles for happiness and success we
outline in our new book, 5 Principles for a Successful Life: From Our Family
to Yours
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109331:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . 

*	Father's Day is coming up on June 21 and Newt.org is running
specials on autographed books
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109332:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> . And speaking of Father's Day, Jackie
is asking for your help with for a Father's Day gift for me. Sure sounds
mysterious. Go to 5principlesoflife.com
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109333:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040>  and she'll tell you all the details.

*	If you're in the Washington, D.C. area, the National Republican
Congressional Committee (NRCC) will be holding a special screening of
Callista's and my film, "Ronald Reagan: Rendezvous with Destiny" this
Sunday. Go to gingrichproductions.com
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109334:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040>  for more details.

*	In the latest Forbes, Peter Ferrara of the Institute for Policy
Innovation asks if President Obama's economic policies are ending the
recession or prolonging it, and offers a plan for how we can do better. Read
it here
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109335:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> .

*	It's hard to believe, but some politicians want to raise an average
family's annual energy bill by $1,500. They're calling it Cap and Trade but
it's really just an energy tax. Help us defeat this destructive bill by
signing the "Stop the Energy Tax" petition
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109336:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040>  today. 

*	Last year, on June 6th, the anniversary of D-Day, over 1,500 radio
stations honored our troops and our nation's religious heritage by playing
Franklin Delano Roosevelt's extraordinary, six-minute, nationally broadcast
prayer
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109337:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040>  to the nation that first aired just
hours after allied troops were storming the beaches of Normandy. Will you
help continue this new patriotic tradition? Just call your favorite radio
program and encourage them to play FDR's D-Day Prayer on June 6. For more
information, including how to reach your favorite radio programs, just go
here
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109338:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> .

*	Callista and I were on location in Poland and Rome last week filming
our upcoming documentary on Pope John Paul II, Nine Days that Changed the
World. You can learn more about this and other documentaries we have made at
gingrichproductions.com
<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3109339:4157622365:m:1:1536358
81:FA0256C8EE12C4AAA01EA1CBA6E36040> .