Obama's Supreme Court Pick is.........

[DiveCon]

She must be qualified or she would not be in a position to be nominated.

That post hoc ergo propter hoc dog don't hunt.

well, Harriet Meirs was in a position to be nominated

 

[Oddball]

Experience has nothing to do with the rightwing crips. Rather it has to do with her own admission to being a judicial activist and her arguments on Latina women being more competent than white men. Jillian admit it. If Alito stated that "as a white man in American I am more qualifed to make judicial decision that a Latina women because of my background and up bringings" people would rightfully be in a shit-storm!

So, I guess Jonathan Turley IS in on the VRWC, huh??

 

[GHook93]

Sotomayor has had well more than half of her opinions that made it to the Supreme Court reverse. And that is without Ricci being overturned yet, as predicted

That is a bad track record anyway you put it! I think this is another example of her judicial activism!

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court - Washington Times

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

But opponents have an uphill battle

.

 

[Ravi]

Sotomayor has had well more than half of her opinions that made it to the Supreme Court reverse. And that is without Ricci being overturned yet, as predicted

That is a bad track record anyway you put it! I think this is another example of her judicial activism!

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court - Washington Times

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

But opponents have an uphill battle

.

You're turning into a regular right wing drone. Less than 1% of her cases ended up at the Supreme Court...so 99% of them were perfectly reasonable rulings by anyone's standards. Only six went to the Supreme Court.

 

[Fraulein Hilda]

It just means they were not appealed.

What percent of any Federal judge's cases are appealed to the SCOTUS?

 

[GHook93]

Sotomayor has had well more than half of her opinions that made it to the Supreme Court reverse. And that is without Ricci being overturned yet, as predicted

That is a bad track record anyway you put it! I think this is another example of her judicial activism!

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court - Washington Times

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

But opponents have an uphill battle

.

You're turning into a regular right wing drone. Less than 1% of her cases ended up at the Supreme Court...so 99% of them were perfectly reasonable rulings by anyone's standards. Only six went to the Supreme Court.

True, but less than 1% of all appellate cases make it to the Supreme Court. However, the majority of her cases that made it to the Supreme Court got overturned! I think is worthy of noting!

 

[Nik]

Sotomayor has had well more than half of her opinions that made it to the Supreme Court reverse. And that is without Ricci being overturned yet, as predicted

That is a bad track record anyway you put it! I think this is another example of her judicial activism!

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court - Washington Times

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

But opponents have an uphill battle

.

Really? Whats the average for amount of cases overturned that make it to the USSC?

 

[Nik]

It just means they were not appealed.

What percent of any Federal judge's cases are appealed to the SCOTUS?

Or the USSC denied cert.

 

[Nik]

Sotomayor has had well more than half of her opinions that made it to the Supreme Court reverse. And that is without Ricci being overturned yet, as predicted

That is a bad track record anyway you put it! I think this is another example of her judicial activism!

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court - Washington Times
.

You're turning into a regular right wing drone. Less than 1% of her cases ended up at the Supreme Court...so 99% of them were perfectly reasonable rulings by anyone's standards. Only six went to the Supreme Court.

True, but less than 1% of all appellate cases make it to the Supreme Court. However, the majority of her cases that made it to the Supreme Court got overturned! I think is worthy of noting!

Overall, this past term the Supreme Court reversed 75.3 percent of the cases they considered on their merits. The pattern holds true for the 2004 and 2005 terms as well, when the Supremes had overall reversal rates of 76.8 percent and 75.6 percent, respectively.

Concurring Opinions » Some Thoughts on the Supreme Court’s Reversal Rate

So actually Sotomayor has a better than average overturn rate...

Whoops!

 

[Yurt]

Sotomayor has had well more than half of her opinions that made it to the Supreme Court reverse. And that is without Ricci being overturned yet, as predicted

That is a bad track record anyway you put it! I think this is another example of her judicial activism!

Sotomayor reversed 60% by high court - Washington Times

With Judge Sonia Sotomayor already facing questions over her 60 percent reversal rate, the Supreme Court could dump another problem into her lap next month if, as many legal analysts predict, the court overturns one of her rulings upholding a race-based employment decision.

Three of the five majority opinions written by Judge Sotomayor for the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, providing a potent line of attack raised by opponents Tuesday after President Obama announced he will nominate the 54-year-old Hispanic woman to the high court.

"Her high reversal rate alone should be enough for us to pause and take a good look at her record. Frankly, it is the Senates duty to do so," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

But opponents have an uphill battle

.

You're turning into a regular right wing drone. Less than 1% of her cases ended up at the Supreme Court...so 99% of them were perfectly reasonable rulings by anyone's standards. Only six went to the Supreme Court.

epic fail....

just because they were not appealed or the scotus did not accept cert, does not mean they were acceptable.

 

[jillian]

True, but less than 1% of all appellate cases make it to the Supreme Court. However, the majority of her cases that made it to the Supreme Court got overturned! I think is worthy of noting!

As you've seen, that's a better than average batting average. FWIW, the Supreme Court doesn't take cases generally if they concur with the result, unless it's to end differences in the decisions between different circuits.

Also, why would you think that a Rhenquist or Roberts court would see the law the same as she does. That's the whole point.... and unless she turns out to be a good dealmaker, she'll probably be part of the court's dissent on most decisions until Scalia, Thomas, Alito Robers or Kennedy retires. No surprises, IMO.

 

[DiveCon]

True, but less than 1% of all appellate cases make it to the Supreme Court. However, the majority of her cases that made it to the Supreme Court got overturned! I think is worthy of noting!

As you've seen, that's a better than average batting average. FWIW, the Supreme Court doesn't take cases generally if they concur with the result, unless it's to end differences in the decisions between different circuits.

Also, why would you think that a Rhenquist or Roberts court would see the law the same as she does. That's the whole point.... and unless she turns out to be a good dealmaker, she'll probably be part of the court's dissent on most decisions until Scalia, Thomas, Alito Robers or Kennedy retires. No surprises, IMO.

and so far, i havent seen a single reason that she shouldnt be confirmed.


i guess i must be too much of a right wing conservative

 

[Oddball]

and so far, i havent seen a single reason that she shouldnt be confirmed.


i guess i must be too much of a right wing conservative

Jonathan Turley found several reasons, not the least of which is that she's an intellectual lightweight.

President Picks Sonia Sotomayor « JONATHAN TURLEY

I guess he'll soon be dropped off the list as one of Keith Olberdouche's go-to guys when he needs to "prove" his propaganda, and maybe even be deemed a "worst person in the world"!!

 

[jillian]

and so far, i havent seen a single reason that she shouldnt be confirmed.


i guess i must be too much of a right wing conservative

I figure you're the same on her confirmation as I was on Roberts.... can argue with the pov, but not the qualifications.

And as far as I've seen, you have a fairly low tolerance level for people who raise non-issues. So it's all good.

 

[DiveCon]

and so far, i havent seen a single reason that she shouldnt be confirmed.


i guess i must be too much of a right wing conservative

Jonathan Turley found several reasons, not the least of which is that she's an intellectual lightweight.

President Picks Sonia Sotomayor « JONATHAN TURLEY

I guess he'll soon be dropped off the list as one of Keith Olberdouche's go-to guys when he needs to "prove" his propaganda, and maybe even be deemed a "worst person in the world"!!

um, where in the constitution does it list that as a qualification for a SCOTUS nominee

or a disqualifier

 

[DiveCon]

and so far, i havent seen a single reason that she shouldnt be confirmed.


i guess i must be too much of a right wing conservative

I figure you're the same on her confirmation as I was on Roberts.... can argue with the pov, but not the qualifications.

And as far as I've seen, you have a fairly low tolerance level for people who raise non-issues. So it's all good.

actually, i believe that SCOTUS appointees are a perk of winning the election and since the constitution doesnt give a list of minimum qualifications for one, anyone he picks, unless a complete idiot, should be confirmed

 

[Oddball]

um, where in the constitution does it list that as a qualification for a SCOTUS nominee

or a disqualifier

Read the Turley piece.

My main concern is the lack of intellectual depth in her past opinions. Objecting to the intellectual content of opinions is not the same as objecting to the intellect of an individual. Smart people can have little vision in the law or other fields. No one would suggest that Sotomayor is not incredibly bright. It is her legal vision and the depth of her legal philosophy that is at issue in confirmation debates.

 

[Nik]

um, where in the constitution does it list that as a qualification for a SCOTUS nominee

or a disqualifier

Read the Turley piece.

My main concern is the lack of intellectual depth in her past opinions. Objecting to the intellectual content of opinions is not the same as objecting to the intellect of an individual. Smart people can have little vision in the law or other fields. No one would suggest that Sotomayor is not incredibly bright. It is her legal vision and the depth of her legal philosophy that is at issue in confirmation debates.

Actually the piece is mainly about how she hasn't fleshed out her intellectual thoughts on a range of issues. That is NOT the same as an intellectual lightweight, and in fact that she hasn't fleshed out those thoughts will, in the end, help her get the nomination.

 

[DiveCon]

um, where in the constitution does it list that as a qualification for a SCOTUS nominee

or a disqualifier

Read the Turley piece.

My main concern is the lack of intellectual depth in her past opinions. Objecting to the intellectual content of opinions is not the same as objecting to the intellect of an individual. Smart people can have little vision in the law or other fields. No one would suggest that Sotomayor is not incredibly bright. It is her legal vision and the depth of her legal philosophy that is at issue in confirmation debates.

i read that
doesnt change anything

 

[Oddball]

Actually the piece is mainly about how she hasn't fleshed out her intellectual thoughts on a range of issues. That is NOT the same as an intellectual lightweight, and in fact that she hasn't fleshed out those thoughts will, in the end, help her get the nomination.

O.K....

Intellectually lazy and incurious, then....Which, from where I stand, is even worse.