Given the fairly weak questions put to Judge Sotomayor during the hearings this week, I submit the following list of questions (many of which would be usable for any Supreme Court nominee):
1) What is the meaning of the phrase 'enumerated powers' and how does that phrase present itself or enter into your judicial reasonings?
2) Why was the Constitution written and why was the Bill of Rights added?
3) Compare and contrast the opposing judicial philosophies of "Original Intent" and of "Legal Realism". Of which school do you most closely adhere and why?
4) What is the Constitutional Authority for an earmark spending item that funds a small local project that neither affects Interstate Commerce nor promotes the "general welfare" of the country at large?
5) The 9th and 10th amendments of the Bill of Rights have come to be largely ignored and are therefore ineffectual in shaping (and controlling) Federal government actions. Is this a healthy trend with respect to individual liberty of the citizen and why should it be continued or reversed?
6) Can the Supreme Court err? If so, what are the various methods to affect a remedy for such error?
7) What is the definition of a "natural born citizen" (as the Constitution states) and where did this phrase originate?
8) Given that your judicial opinions vs your off-court statements and writings seem to present two different views, which philosophy would dominate in the mind of a confirmed Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor?
9) If the percentage of citizens who essentially pay no income tax becomes a majority of the country's voters, what might be the likely impacts of that circumstance on the republic?
10) What is the definition of the "rule of law" that you use as a judge?
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 32
I think the volume of legal writings she has submitted speaks for her judicial qualifications not to mention her extensive judicial career.
I believe she has more legal experience than any nominee over the past 100 years before they became a justice.
It would be hard to dismiss her based on a "possible" ideology conflict.
What conceivable reason would you put forward for why these are NOT valid Supreme Court nominee questions?
The trouble with this nominee is that the "unconstrained" writer/speaker Sotomayor has different views than the "constrained" lower court justice Sotomayor opinions. If placed on the Supreme Court, which Sotomayor would remain? She has not been consistent in her words. That is a problem. Surely we can find a judge that speaks and writes and lives the same way that he/she rules from the bench?
Our reps are told what to do, and trade votes behind closed doors so we don't catch on - especially around election time. It's intimidation 101 and if you do some research on those "pushed" out of office - wire taps, etc. etc. - just do some research as to their philosophies and what they wanted to accomplish.
Don't forget about JFK, JFK Jr. and hundreds of others who "didn't go-along".
It seems to be you who are the one who is looking at her decisions as coming from somewhere other than the law.
Did you feel this way when Roberts was nominated? I know I did, but I didn't know enough about the man as a judge to vocally oppose him. He was qualified and experienced even though he was DEFINITELY biased.
I find it humorous that you mention "natural born citizen" in your questions, seeing as how republicans, and in particular the likes of corporatists like Roberts, have granted corporations personhood in this country.
But, I'm sure that your point in bringing that up was that you're one of the kooks that believes the rigthwing BS that Obama isn't a natural born US citizen, and is therefore unqualified to serve as POTUS, and is therefore unqualified to select a SCOTUS nominee. I truly am entertained at the lunatic beliefs of the lunatic fringe. Thanks!
Meanwhile, she'll be confirmed, so learn to deal with it, somehow.
It is interesting that while the US House had a congressional hearing on McCain's eligibility, that step was avoided for the Obama. It is also interesting that he will not release a long form birth certificate. Such an easy step to kill the issue but yet he won't. Interesting also is the significant lawyer money he has spent to avoid answering this simple question.
The concerns of the Founders, that a person serving as President without 100% American affinities would be an undesirable circumstance, seems to be playing out in the words and deeds of this President. He apologizes for America, denies her accomplishments, ignores the industry and generosity of her people, makes accomodation to every foreign power within sight, and sets out to lead an economic surrender of the country.
Yes she'll probably be confirmed by the unthinking Democratic Senate although so would have Minnie Mouse had the president desired to nominate a female rodent.
Perhaps, that's because Obama is a natural born US citizen, while McCain was born in Panama? Just a thought. Crazy, I know.
"It is also interesting that he will not release a long form birth certificate."
What's interesting is that he (and the state of Hawaii, where he was born) have done so. Check your facts. Interesting as well that it didn't slow the loony toon wingnut base down on this idiotic obsession. Such an easy thing to get over. Just look at the birth certficate, recognize that it's real, and move on with your lives. Yet, you people are simply incapable of doing so. You'd rather obsess about this forever, because you simply cannot accept the fact that a black man is in the white house. Sorry. Deal with reality for a change.
"He apologizes for America, denies her accomplishments, ignores the industry and generosity of her people, makes accomodation to every foreign power within sight, and sets out to lead an economic surrender of the country."
What a shock...yet more delusional rightwing lies about Obama. How unique.
"Yes she'll probably be confirmed by the unthinking Democratic Senate although so would have Minnie Mouse had the president desired to nominate a female rodent. "
She's infinitely more qualified to serve on the SCOTUS than your rightwing hacks, who, as I recall, subverted the constitution and disallowed the state of FL from conducting its constitutional duty in the 2000 election. Oh sorry...didn't mean to douse you with yet more reality there. Hope you can get over that someday as well.
I don't care one whit that he is black. I do care that he is a Statist and yet pretended otherwise during his less than forthright campaign. It is also sad that you open-minded accepting libs always play the racism card over and over when it is you that are racist..
The so-called 'birth-certificate' wouldn't serve as valid ID even in Hawaii. Hence it is NOT a birth certificate. It simply certifies that Obama was born someplace and at least one of his parents told the State of Hawaii that such place was in the state. Maybe so, maybe not. Show us the long form.
Obama's denigration of this country when overseas is well documented.
Sotomayor is a fine Appeals Court judge meaning that she can follow the dictates and precedents of the higher court above here. She has not shown a consistent respect for the Constitution and rule of law in her off-court comments. But since you want a justice that will stretch the "Living Constitution" in every imaginable way, I can see why you support her. Agenda before principle as usual.
I know it's ugly as hell, and frankly, if I were married to such a diseased and entirely racist party, I'd be trying to deny it and point fingers at others as well, I suppose, but facts is facts, bucko. Sorry 'bout that. You picked the racist party to align yourself with. Care to re-think that rather sorry choice?
"The so-called 'birth-certificate' wouldn't serve as valid ID even in Hawaii. "
Jesus, you people are REALLY this stupid, aren't you? Ok, here's your proof, fool. Read and weep. Sorry that I can't provide a link to some flakey, kook, fringe element like you're relying upon for your "proof," but this entirely non-partisan, entirely factual, entirely documented source will have to suffice (hint: It works for everybody in this country except for you kook 20 percenters...that's a sign). How's come none of you freaks can PROVE that he's NOT a US citizen? Hmmmmm? PROVE that the birth certificate is a FAKE, if you're so dead right on this.
Fact is, you're dead wrong on it, and deep down, you know you are. It's pathetic. You're SO full of hatred at this brilliant black man being in the white house that you've decided that attaching yourself to the kook fringe in order to villify him is better than living in the world of reality and accepting that he's the POTUS. Pathetic. Truly sad and pathetic.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
"Obama's denigration of this country when overseas is well documented."
Yes, in kook rightwingnut land, of course. Meanwhile, here on earth, no such documentation exists, and I see that you've failed to back your statements with any, so I guess that speaks volumes, donut?
"She has not shown a consistent respect for the Constitution and rule of law in her off-court comments."
That's odd, because every case that she's heard, that I've heard discussed, it's been found that she sided EXACTLY for the rule of law and the constitution. What color is the sky in your world, or can you even see it through your tinfoil hat? Does it hurt to be this blindly partisan and full of racist rage? It's awfully ugly to see, I have to admit.
"But since you want a justice that will stretch the "Living Constitution" in every imaginable way, I can see why you support her. Agenda before principle as usual. "
Oh, you mean like how the wingnut justices sides AGAINST the constitution in 2000, in order to select booshie boy as POTUS, rather than allow the state to conduct its presidential election, as the constitution VERY CLEARLY CALLS FOR? Remember how, in their findings, they wrote that this case couldn't be used as a precendant for any other cases? Gee, I wonder why they'd write something like that, unless, of course, they KNEW that they were stretching the "living constitution" in every imaginable way, in order to put agenda before principle, as usual.
Can't say much about that one, can you, partisan? You're a foolish, angry, hateful, twisted partisan hack, blinded by your miserably failed ideology. I pity you.
Am I hearing you correctly?
You really seem upset that this man is leading our country. I am curious to why that is.
Do you not believe that he loves this country?
Do you not believe that he understands the beauty and the richness of the struggles this country has faced throughout its history?
Do you not believe he has the experience?
I am trying to remember how I felt when GWB was elected. I remember feeling that he may have been a little unqualified based on his education but he did have experience in the military and he had a father as president and he served as governer so I only really had concerns over his moral and civil rights issues (abortion, homosexuality, euthanasia, public education).
I don't think I came across as a Repub hater. I tried to understand conservative thinking and expressed my concerns.
You know, I remember Clark when he first started blogging on this site. He tried to inform, educate, and express his opinions. Now he has become so agitated at his opposition that he has become his opposition.
Seriously, when you look at this nominee's experience and her judicial record, isn't it difficult to say that she isn't qualified?
The point seems to really be that you as a conservative thinking individual feel that she will make liberal decisions and that doesn't agree with you, right?
Question Two - NO
Question Three - NO
Clark is right that she will be appointed - we have no say so or a choice.
As I mentioned in my first comment, the issue with Sotomayor is not her experience or even her record but rather the inconsistency between her off-court statements/writings vs her record. They seem to indicate that perhaps a Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor might take a more expansive view of the Constitution as a "living" document which ought to be interpreted in keeping with modern mores and thinking. This is of course a dangerous path as it removes all guidance from the Constitution except what judges want it to have at any given time. Take the admittedly "bait" question about Obama's birth certificate. Clark wants me to prove that he is not a citizen. Obviously the Constitutional burden is on Obama (who desires to be President) to prove that he meets the requirements. If he hasn't done so (as some think) then where is the respect for the Constitution? Ignored or forgotten? Same for nationalizing businesses, dictating private salaries, appointing many czars as henchmen for the administration, and setting up to dictate what health care procedures you will be allowed to have. All these things have dubious Constitutional support and are very dangerous to the "freedom" Americans have to live and conduct business without government permission at every step. A Supreme Court justice who sees nothing wrong with these steps or even one that doesn't require or establish the Constitutional Authority for them (because they match up with the Justice's view of social justice or legal realism or whatever) is not a Justice we want.
Also the majority of her opinions that have been appealed to the Supreme Court have been overturned by it. That is not an example of excellence rising to the top of a profession. Normally candidates are promoted when their decisions are validated by those above them rather than the other way around.
As for Obama, in a nutshell he admits that our free enterprise system has created the most prosperous, productive, free, and accepting society in the world. Yet his every action is to tear down that system and replace it with one with government at the center. His entire adult life has been about using government to force changes in society that "He" wants. But he is not King, and his arrogance, lack of transparency, and complete unwillingness to consider (much less incorporate) free market measures in the Stimulus, Energy, and Health care efforts proves his affinity is for what he wants America to become and not for what it is and has been.
I think it would be really wicked if you break those stories here, rather than on Lou Dobbs or Glen Beck.
Sorry...I've developed zero tolerance for stupidity at this point, and sadly, that's all that seems to remain in the dishelved, demolished, broken republican party. Just witness the issues that they focus on...teabagging? Funny, but they weren't one teensy bit concerned about federal debt spending while their republican leaders were driving this nation $11 trillion into debt over the past 28 years, but now that a democrat is in the white house, it's a fricking unspeakable horror. Suffice to say that if McCain had won, they'd be just fine and dandy with it, as they have been for the past 3 decades.
"Obama's not a real citizen?" Please. This is as kooky as kooky can possibly get. And, I'm supposed to show respect to anyone that actually believes this ca-ca? Can't do it. Sorry. I have zero tolerance for stupid at this point. They've pushed me beyond my limits for it, and I'm pushing back.
"hey seem to indicate that perhaps a Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor might take a more expansive view of the Constitution as a "living" document which ought to be interpreted in keeping with modern mores and thinking."
Such as how the rightwing justices overstepped their constitutional bounds in order to select George W Bush as POTUS, thereby violating the constitutional rights of millions of FL voters, as well as subverting the constitutional duty of the state to conduct its own presidential elections.
For some strange reason, Ken seems unable to comment on that pesky little fact. Further evidence of just how much a shameless partisan hypocrite he really is. In reality, the only REAL difference is that she happens to be brown and female, and those are two things that republicans simply cannot accept. Sad, but true. The GOP is the party of racists.
"Clark wants me to prove that he is not a citizen. "
Well gosh, that's mighty unreasonable of me, isn't it? Especially since Obama, the local newspaper, and the entire state of Hawaii has already verified that he's a natural born, US citizen. YOU'RE the one claiming otherwise, and doing so by relying entirely upon fabricated nonsense from rightwing kook websites and none other than previously self-shamed, proven liar Jerome Corsi, who disgraced himself by lying in order to smear decorated war hero John Kerry during the 2004 election campaign. THIS is who you've aligned yourself with, and are basing this utter nonsensical belief on, and you want others to take you seriously?
Sorry. I have zero tolerance for stupid at this point, and this is as stupid as anything else the republicans have said and done over the past several years. It's no wonder the masses have fled this diseased party of complete fools. What person in their right mind would want to associate with such ridiculous clowns?
Here's a bit of factual information, for those of us who haven't been sniffing paint fumes and leaded gasoline for too many years:
In order for Obama to NOT be a natural born citizen, as these birther kooks claim, here's what would've had to have happened:
1) A poverty-stricken mother in Kenya would have to have known, in 1961, before she gave birth, that the baby to be born was one day going to run for POTUS.
2) Knowing this, she then would've had to somehow talk the local paper in Hawaii, as well as all Hawaii government officials then through now, to go along with the conspiracy.
3) Once all of this was in place, this poverty-stricken mother would've had to somehow get herself and child to America, in order to build this facade of the child being born there, and would also then have to somehow force that child to become brilliant enough to become highly educated, and force him to steer himself towards politics.
4) Granted, this would've all happened decades before anyone in this country or the rest of the world could even imagine a black man ever becoming POTUS. This was before the civil rights movement, and before the democratic party threw away their racists and the republicans warmly embraced them.
Apparently, however, even though this remarkable woman was somehow able to pull off this utterly masterful deception and colossal conspiracy, she was inexplicably unable to keep the "truth" from the rightwing kook blog sites. It seems as though, back in 1961, while she was crafting this rather insidious, genius plan to overthrow democracy in America, she failed to take into account just how powerful the rightwing kook blog sites on the internet would become.
Were it not for that one simple little underestimation of the enemy, she'd have fully succeeded in pulling off what was arguably the greatest coup in world history. But, thanks to the likes of Ken here, she's been unable to get away with it. She's been outsmarted and outmaneuvered by the pajama brigadge and the teabaggers!
Honestly, if any of this were actually true, one could only surmise that the woman was acting as the hand of God, and therefore, Barak is actually Jesus Christ. In order for the magnitude of conspiracies to have been pulled off to the point that the birthers claim they were, there would HAVE to have been divine guidance, and in that case, these nutbags should be WORSHIPPING Obama, not villifying him! Oh, the world is so full of delicious ironies, isn't it?
Have fun living in that bubble o' delusion there, Ken. Don't fret about the wild, raucus laughter and subdued snickers that you hear when you walk about the real world. Only YOU and your tinfoil hat friends know the real truth.
I beat you to this point by four years. Pre Bush takeover and destruction of this country, I would never have spoken to people the way I do today. I learned that it is not possible to have a polite conversation with bullies who spread lies.
Take a breath (at least as long as Obama ALLOWS you to take that breath). Bush would have won anyways. Case closed. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_election_recount
I have stated the "interesting" aspects of the birth certificate issue above which apparently you didn't read.
Either Obama is NOT legit or he has zero regard for the Constitution and the millions of Americans who didn't vote for him and of which about 1 Million have signed petitions asking for his actual long form birth certificate. Such a simple step but he won't take it and he fights it with endless lawyer dollars. Why? Simply why not do that if he is as legit as you say?
Even if I accept your kaka numbers that Republicans alone were responsible for an 11Trillion deficit over 28 years (which I don't), I can still find it horrible that Obama built up an additional 11 Trillion deficit in LESS THAN 6 MONTHS! You should as well or is your reasoning that Bush deficits were bad so it is ok for Obama to quadruple them already with more coming?
I can and have said I disagree with Republican overspending. You cannot and will not admit the same for the hallowed Obama. In your drone-like eyes, he can do no wrong.
You mean illegal aliens are now trying to limit how long I can hold my breath? Do you have any documentation to support THIS suggestion, or is it just another of your goofy, totally unfounded claims?
"Bush would have won anyways. Case closed"
Actually, although the case IS closed, Bush would NOT have won, had all of the votes been counted, and your claim doesn't excuse your rightwing partisan justices from trampling on the constitution in order to select your precious little boy for the white house. Regardless of the eventual outcome, the FACT remains, the SCOTUS had NO constitutional authority WHATSOEVER, to step in and stop a state from carrying out its constitutional obligation. Had it been a partisan DEMOCRATIC-leaning group of justices that sided for Gore, and he been selected, rather than your little boy, you'd have (rightfully) been in a fricking holy uproar over it, but you can't admit that, because you're too much the blind partisan hack. Left = evil. Right = holy and righteous.
"I have stated the "interesting" aspects of the birth certificate issue above which apparently you didn't read."
I've read all of the rightwing crapola that there is on this BS claim, and have also done something you kooks apparently can't force yourselves to do....read the FACTS as well. Your claim is nonsensical, which is why it's only being held by the farthest rightwing extreme fringe elements of the far rightwing of the fringey rightwing of the republican party. No reasonable, rational, intelligent person on the planet follows this BS.
"Either Obama is NOT legit or he has zero regard for the Constitution and the millions of Americans who didn't vote for him and of which about 1 Million have signed petitions asking for his actual long form birth certificate. Such a simple step but he won't take it and he fights it with endless lawyer dollars. Why? Simply why not do that if he is as legit as you say? "
Why? Gee, let's see....maybe because he and the state of Hawaii, as well as the local paper, and everyone that has anything to do with it at an offical, documented level, has already provided the PROOF, and you morons have refused to accept it.
If he were to produce the "long form," as you insist, you'd come up with some other dumbass claim, such as "well, anyone can fake a long form birth certificate...this proves nothing,' or perhaps something like "Do we really know that Hawaii was actually an official state at the time?," or perhaps "Just because he was born in a US state doesn't mean he's a natural born US citizen...his mother could've been artifically induced."
You see, when people such as yourself are willing to cling to the utter nonsense that you've allowed yourself to become immersed in thus far, no amount of proof will EVER suffice. You will ALWAYS believe that there's no possible way that a black man is in the white house, and you'll carry that belief to your grave, sadly.
"Even if I accept your kaka numbers that Republicans alone were responsible for an 11Trillion deficit over 28 years (which I don't), "
Don't believe me. Look up the CBO numbers for yourself. Perhaps, you'd like to share with the class the last time it was that a republican president offered up a budget surplus? Nah, didn't think so. For the record, the last time, and the ONLY time a president has produced a budget surplus in the past 3 decades, was your seconfavorite guy, Bubba. Ouch. That has GOT to hurt, huh? Sorry.
"I can still find it horrible that Obama built up an additional 11 Trillion deficit in LESS THAN 6 MONTHS! "
Where exactly is it that you loons get this sort of BS? World Nut Daily? Freeper? Who is it that's feeding you people this absolute garbage truck full of misinformation? No WONDER you're so far off this planet on so many issues.
"I can and have said I disagree with Republican overspending. You cannot and will not admit the same for the hallowed Obama. In your drone-like eyes, he can do no wrong.
"
Nice try, pal. Too bad everybody can read for themselves, in this very response of yours, that you don't agree that your precious republiCONs have driven us into the $11 trillion in debt that they've driven us into. And, I'm not an Obama worshipper, in case you haven't noticed. I just don't feel it worthy to make dumb shit up about him, nor do I feel it valid to eviscerate him after merely 6 months in office, although I will say that I'm more than a little pissed off that he's embraced some of the more wicked, illegal aspects of the criminal bush administration, and appears far less the progressive liberal than the person I voted for claimed to be.
"drone-like eyes?" Funny stuff, coming from the biggest, blindest, most partisan rightwing apologist I've ever run across, next to that delusional freak Don H, or whatever the hell his moniker is.
The link I referenced above discusses a study done jointly by numerous media outlets which DID count the votes and Bush won. Move into the present.
Sorry, but the only recount actually conducted found that Gore won. Get over it. Your boy lost. Regardless, it doesn't excuse your highly partisan, "living document," activist, rightwing justices from violating their oath of office by subverting the constitution in order to select the POTUS in 2000. No matter how hard you try, you can't spin that away.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/111201a.html
Check out any right wingnut talk show.
This is what they actually say, check it out yourself.
Obama will tax the co2 we exhale.
Obama has built huge concentration camps to hold those who disagree with him.
Obama has appointed Czars who can overide the constitution.
Obama will jail any pastor who talks ill of homsexuallity.
Obama will take your gun and bible away.
If a pedophile rapes your child and you stop him, you may go to jail for interfering with his constitutional right.
PSYCHOS!!!!!
The list goes on and on. They want their crazies to start a war. They want another Timothy McVeigh!
I remember the Militia movement.
These nut cases threatend our congressmen. Look at your congressman because one day you may have to shoot him in the face.
They too were making excuses to fight the government.
Once, Al Gore said Yellowstone belonged to the world and these psychos claimed he sold the park to the U N.
Stop signs have a bar code in the back that identifies all gunowners in the area, to make it easier for the U N troops to enslave us.
Never misunderestimate a psycho!
I'd personally like to see a poll of how many people in this country are actually stupid enough to swallow this tripe. I'm guessing that it's probably in single digits, but you never can tell. The rightwing media is extremely far-reaching and powerful, so it's entirely possible that they've brainwashed 10% or more with this utter trash. One thing is certain, those who gravitate towards this type of nonsense certainly aren't going to tune into any media outlets that offer the truth, because those are the "librul media," and, as Colbert brilliantly pointed out at the white house press dinner some years ago, we all know that the truth has an obvious liberal slant!