"Sotomayor Explains 'Wise Latina' Comment".
Sotomayor explains 'wise Latina' comment
David Lightman
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor tried Tuesday to defuse controversy over her remarks that a "wise Latina' could reach better conclusions that white males by saying, "I do not believe any racial, ethnic or gender group has an advantage in sound judgment."
Tuesday was the first day that the 55-year-old federal appellate judge, bidding to become the first Hispanic woman on the Supreme Court, faced questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee.
What little controversy remains often centers on her 2001 remarks about the advantages of being a Latino woman; Republicans have vowed to quiz her later Tuesday.
So Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., quickly got Sotomayor to defend herself.
"You've heard all these charges and countercharges . . . here's your chance. You tell us what's going on here, judge," Leahy said.
"No words I have ever spoken nor written have received so much attention," she said, chuckling. "I was trying to inspire them to believe their life experiences would enrich the legal system, because different life experiences and backgrounds always do. I don't think there is a quarrel with that in our society."
She said that she also was trying to inspire minorities to be anything they wanted.
The context of the words, however, Sotomayor acknowledged, "have created a misunderstanding, and to give everyone assurances I want to state up front without doubt I do not believe any racial, ethnic or gender group has an advantage in sound judgment.
"I do believe every person has an equal opportunity to be a good and wise judge regardless of their background or life experience."
Leahy, the first senator to ask questions, tried to ease other controversies, too. What qualities, he asked, does a judge have, and how does that shape your approach to your work?
Sotomayor cited the comments of other senators, who said that a judge had to show respect for the Constitution and "an understanding that respect is guided by . . . a full appreciate of the limited jurisdiction of the court in our system of government, but understanding its importance as well. That is the central part of judging."
Leahy dived right in to what's likely to be the biggest controversy of the hearing: Sotomayor's ruling, along with two other judges, that the New Haven, Conn., fire department didn't deny Frank Ricci a promotion unfairly. The Supreme Court reversed that decision by a 5-4 vote.
The case was decided "on the basis of a very thorough 78-page decision by the district court and on the basis of established precedent," she said.
"The issue in Ricci was what the city did or could do when it was presented with a challenge to one of its tests for promotion," Sotomayor explained. "This was not a quota case. This was not an affirmative action case. This was a challenge to a test that everybody agreed had a very wide difference in the pass rate of a variety of different groups."
She also addressed any notion that she isn't tough on crime, recalling her days in the New York prosecutor's office and how she learned that "each case gets decided case by case."
The Tarzan murder case, she said — named after a man who used acrobatic feats as he committed his crimes — was an early test for her. As a young prosecutor, she helped convict murderer Richard Maddicks. She said that learned about the human consequences of crime and the law.
"That family was destroyed. They scattered to the four winds, and only one brother remained in New York who could testify. That case taught me that prosecutors, as all participants in the justice system, must be sensitive to the price crime imposes on our entire society," she recalled.
David Lightman
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor tried Tuesday to defuse controversy over her remarks that a "wise Latina' could reach better conclusions that white males by saying, "I do not believe any racial, ethnic or gender group has an advantage in sound judgment."
Tuesday was the first day that the 55-year-old federal appellate judge, bidding to become the first Hispanic woman on the Supreme Court, faced questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee.
What little controversy remains often centers on her 2001 remarks about the advantages of being a Latino woman; Republicans have vowed to quiz her later Tuesday.
So Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., quickly got Sotomayor to defend herself.
"You've heard all these charges and countercharges . . . here's your chance. You tell us what's going on here, judge," Leahy said.
"No words I have ever spoken nor written have received so much attention," she said, chuckling. "I was trying to inspire them to believe their life experiences would enrich the legal system, because different life experiences and backgrounds always do. I don't think there is a quarrel with that in our society."
She said that she also was trying to inspire minorities to be anything they wanted.
The context of the words, however, Sotomayor acknowledged, "have created a misunderstanding, and to give everyone assurances I want to state up front without doubt I do not believe any racial, ethnic or gender group has an advantage in sound judgment.
"I do believe every person has an equal opportunity to be a good and wise judge regardless of their background or life experience."
Leahy, the first senator to ask questions, tried to ease other controversies, too. What qualities, he asked, does a judge have, and how does that shape your approach to your work?
Sotomayor cited the comments of other senators, who said that a judge had to show respect for the Constitution and "an understanding that respect is guided by . . . a full appreciate of the limited jurisdiction of the court in our system of government, but understanding its importance as well. That is the central part of judging."
Leahy dived right in to what's likely to be the biggest controversy of the hearing: Sotomayor's ruling, along with two other judges, that the New Haven, Conn., fire department didn't deny Frank Ricci a promotion unfairly. The Supreme Court reversed that decision by a 5-4 vote.
The case was decided "on the basis of a very thorough 78-page decision by the district court and on the basis of established precedent," she said.
"The issue in Ricci was what the city did or could do when it was presented with a challenge to one of its tests for promotion," Sotomayor explained. "This was not a quota case. This was not an affirmative action case. This was a challenge to a test that everybody agreed had a very wide difference in the pass rate of a variety of different groups."
She also addressed any notion that she isn't tough on crime, recalling her days in the New York prosecutor's office and how she learned that "each case gets decided case by case."
The Tarzan murder case, she said — named after a man who used acrobatic feats as he committed his crimes — was an early test for her. As a young prosecutor, she helped convict murderer Richard Maddicks. She said that learned about the human consequences of crime and the law.
"That family was destroyed. They scattered to the four winds, and only one brother remained in New York who could testify. That case taught me that prosecutors, as all participants in the justice system, must be sensitive to the price crime imposes on our entire society," she recalled.
Labels: General information
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 5:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home