Today, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee began its hearings to determine whether to confirm President Obama's first nominee, federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor, to be a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. By the time some of you read this post, Judge Sotomayor may already have been confirmed -- or rejected -- by the Senate.
Click here to read the article about the first day of the confirmation hearings, and then address one or more of the following prompts:
How do these hearings provide an example of the Constitutional concept of checks and balances?
If confirmed, Sotomayor would be the first Hispanic American and only the third woman to ever serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. Do you think diversity on the nation's highest court is important? Why or why not?
Some Senators are concerned about comments made by Judge Sotomayor in a 2002 speech when she said that, "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." What do you think she meant by this? Do you share these senators concerns? Why or why not?
All federal judges are first nominated by the President and then confirmed by the Senate. Knowing that, do you think there is any way for them to be "above politics"? Why or why not? Should they be?
13 comments:
Well, first off, I have to wonder if Sotomayor is being nominated and voted for because of her background or her ability. Throughout the last presidential election, people raved about the prospect of the first black president. Although Sotomayor seems extremely qualified for the position, it's hard to say if this new drive for diversity is having any effect on the decision.
While having an ethnically diverse government isn't exactly a bad thing, I don't think it’s all that important, either. In my opinion, a difference in the gender and ethnicity among our leaders is a big step from our previous white, male-dominated society. However, anyone being considered for a position (especially one of such great importance as the Supreme Court) should be considered for their abilities and their merit, not for where they come from or how they were raised.
I do think that diversity is important in our high ranking courts; it gives more fair and unbiased results. I also think that it is important to have representation from the different races of people who live in the United States. However, I feel that all of the sudden the US government system is being bombarded with a lot of diversity, which is great if it is being done for the correct reasons—but is it, or is it only to gain support? And, if it is, is it still considered a good thing? This is just something I feel should be brought up.
When judge Sotomayor made that statement, I think she was basing it on the way things have happened in history. For example, unlike white males, women have had to fight for their freedom and rights, especially women of a different race. I think this can give women a different outlook on situations that some men wouldn’t see. Therefore she is saying that a Latina woman can make a completely different conclusion, maybe based on more personal experiences. I think she is correct in some ways, but I also see the concerns of the senators. I don’t think that a Latina woman would come up with a better conclusion than a white male, just a different one. For the concerns: why did she make that statement, she should have known that it would get taken out of context. Does the senate really want someone who will stir up this much controversy?
I don't think it is important to have diversity on the Nation's highest court because the law is supposed to be applied fairly and equally, without prejudice or bias. It shouldn't matter if you’re fat, skinny, purple, blue, or green, because your interpretation should not be based on background experience. I feel that everyone should have an equal chance, but people base their opinions on ethnic heritage, economic situation and life experiences, to name a few factors. Diversity shouldn’t be the issue here; the issue should be the qualified candidates have the opportunities to apply the law as it was meant to be applied. We are all equal in the eyes of the law, as it should be.
In the political world these days, being different is not a bad thing. Especially in the ‘08 Presidential Election. We had a black candidate and a female candidate. Both candidates broke barriers and gathered many supporters. Now we have Sotomayor, a Supreme Court nominee, who is a female Hispanic American. Will her differences gain her support? Probably. If confirmed by the Senate, she’ll be the first Hispanic American and only one of three females to serve. That is a huge step. But is she the right person to take that step and break that barrier? Thankfully, the Senate hearings are checking President Obama’s nominee by requiring Sotomayor to prove herself as a well-qualified person for the job and not just as a “first” who has a heartwarming story.
On the other hand, having a Hispanic American woman in the US Supreme Court, as long as she is proven to be qualified of course, would be an asset. She could be an attractive force for politics. Americans in the past have only really experienced the national politics of white males. They’ve only experienced a portion of the talent and intelligence that is out there. If the Senate confirms Sotomayor, it could encourage more men and women who are members of minority groups to be involved in government, which could bring new views to politics that maybe we’ve been missing before.
I believe that it is very important to have diversity in the highest court. The government of our country is supposed to represent the people, therefore producing decisions based upon what the majority wants. Because we live in such a diverse nation, I think it essential to have different ethnicities in each division of government. Our country has a long and rocky history when it comes to discrimination against race, and these steps, the first African American president, and a Hispanic American Supreme Court judge, are very important. The government needs to become aware that they are representing much more than the middle and upper-class Caucasian Americans. By having Sotomayor as a Supreme Court judge we can begin to ensure all of America that each race will be taken into account as the government makes decisions for all of America.
I also agree with Kathy. I don't think that the country should get caught up with putting people in different positions just because of there ethnicity. Qualifications are also very important, but I believe that President Obama and the rest of our government are already very aware of this.
Bonjour, Mrs. Stotler! I think it is important to have diversity in the court because, even though the government is supposed to be equal to every individual, sometimes it's hard to do that when you don't know everyone's situation. Having diversity shows that America is not being discrimitive, but that reason could be why Sonia was nominated by Obama in the first place, not based on how well she did, but just because of her ethnic background...I think I got lost when I was typing..Sorry if that just made a circle...
~H. Baker
I do believe that diversity is important in the highest US court. There are many races in the United States and people of the different races should feel as though they are being represented equally. However, the people who are chosen to be leaders should not be chosed only for their ethnicity but also for their qualifications. Sotomayor's comment was taken out of context making it sound as though she believed she would be a better candidate than a white male because of her ethnicity and the experiences she has had. I agree with Sarah in that Sotomayor will not necessarily develop better conclusions, just different conclusions. No matter what race a leader is or what experiences a leader has had, they all have to make decisions based on the same law and should be chosen because they will follow that law.
I believe that diversity in the Supreme Court is important. America is changing, and everyone living in America wants to feel like they’re being spoken for or represented. However, I don’t believe diversity is effecting the decisions on who to pick for the position. I believe Sotomayor was brave, being the only Hispanic American women to run for this position in government. Now that there are a variety of people, with different opinions, and backgrounds, I think decisions are being made on whose best for the job. There probably would’ve been diversity in government a long time ago if people were brave enough to put themselves out there, having a diverse government shows that we’re changing for the better as a country, and we’re not judging people negatively on their race or gender.
I think that diversity and equality are important, but Sotomayor’s qualifications are most important. If a white male had grabbed the president’s attention I’m sure he would have nominated him for the position. That being said Sotomayor had to have quite a resume to be nominated because we would suspect that our president would be picking whoever would do the job best. Even if the president did not we have our senate to check that. The fact that she is latina woman provides diversity, which is an added bonus, but is not the reason she was solely picked.
Coming back to the statement she made I totally agree with Sarah. Since we do not have the background of the whole conversation I’m sure it is not meant to be racist. What she is trying to say is that because of her experiences she will have a different insight. Which it is important to have many diverse insights because our nation is diverse!
-Cori Martin
I agree with Mary. Politics is politics and Sotomayor's ethnicity may play a big role in her success. But it is even more important for her to be qualified. As long as our government can maintain a balance of qualified, while also diverse people, then why should it matter whether she is a woman or a man or a hispanic or white guy. There is a portion of the population that would rather have the white guy, but of course, there is a portion of our population that is a minority that can identify with Sotomayor. I dont think she meant anything by her comment about being a hispanic woman with rich experiences. I bet she does have much richer experiences than half of the people in the court.
-Rebecca
Every politition, no matter what position they hold in government, state or federal, has to watch what they say publicly. There have been concerns over wheather or not Judge Sotomayor will bring bias to the federal court system. The cause of these concerns is the well known statement that Sotomayor said in a 2002 speech:
"I would hope that a wise latina woman with the richness of her experiances would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
What exactly Judge Sotomayor meant by this statement may never be known. However, she should have spoken more clearly her intentions when she said it. If she had, then this controversy would not exist. I too share the concerns of the senators. There is no room for bias in the Supreme court or any other court for that matter. Hopefully Sotomayor is not racist, as this statement might suggest. If she is than she is not fit to be a judge in the United States of America. But as I said earlier one can never know exactly what she meant. I believe she had good intentions when she said it even if it doesn't seem that way. Everyone makes mistakes(such as John Roberts in Obama's Oath of Office). If you haven't made a mistake during a speech as a politition, than your not a politition.
- Brian Fairbrother
I've never thought about Sotomayor being nominated because of the new deiversity kick we're in! While I'm sure this has played a role in the decision, I don't believe its the only reason. She does seem very qualified for the position.
I believe being diverse can only expand our system and our government. I mean, hey.. the more people we have on our side, the better right? In this time frame we're in right now (esp. the recession) we need all the help we can get, and other countries can see that we aren't white, male-dominated gives them the idea of "Hey, they seem to be a little more accepting of other ideas."
I am not concerned with that Sotomayor said. I mean, its kinda true. Why should a white male get the position just because of his ethnicity? Its whoever is most qualified for the spot. While her being nominated doesn't necessarly mean she'll make better decisions, but we could have different opinions since she is Hispanic American. It could be a huge break through!
The issue shouldn't be diversity, it NEEDS to be about who's helping run this country. They need to be quilified!
I do think that having a hispanic judge is important for inspireing others, but in terms of her duty I do not think diversity is important. The supreme court is supposed to be unbiased interpretation of the law. Diversity is not bad to have in the courts but no decision should ever be made because of it. I am concerned with the "a wise latino makes better decisions than a white male" statment because in this quote suggests that her race would effect her decisions. But her record shows a very fair unbaised career, so her performance in the supreme court will be interesting to see which way she goes. Her victory into the position with 68-31 votes, along with nine republican votes proves that the senate believes her to perform her duty appropriately. This is a great example of the concept of checks and balances because it involes all three branches, a judge appointed by the president then approved by congress. It is with this system that I am reasured that Sonia Sotomayor is the right woman for the job.
Post a Comment