Editorials Comment On Sotomayor Confirmation

Main Category: Women's Health / Gynecology
Also Included In: Litigation / Medical Malpractice
Article Date: 11 Aug 2009 - 1:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

Several newspapers published editorials in response to the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. Sotomayor was confirmed Thursday by a Senate vote of 68 to 31. Summaries of the editorials appear below.

~ Baltimore Sun: The Senate's vote to confirm Sotomayor "demonstrated that no amount of smoke, mirrors and parsing of eight-year-old speeches was ever going to derail a nominee with strong qualifications, 17 years of experience on the bench and, perhaps most importantly, mainstream moderate views," the editorial says. However, the vote "did not rise to the truly bipartisan 78-22 confirmation tally for Chief Justice John Roberts in 2005," which is "unfortunate," it continues, adding that opposing Sotomayor "won't help Republicans out of the political wilderness." The GOP "now has some serious fence-mending to do with Hispanics and women -- much to Democrats' delight" -- the editorial says (Baltimore Sun, 8/7).

~ Hartford Courant: Sotomayor's confirmation is an "unsettling reminder of how little the high court is like the rest of America," the editorial says. While the Supreme Court "can't and shouldn't reflect the populace in every way," the "problem" is that "there has been a paucity of seats held by able, well-qualified members of minority groups," including only three women and two African-Americans, it says. The court has been "the most homogeneous institution in American public life," after the presidency, the editorial continues, concluding, "The recent ascent of people of ability such as Barack Obama ... and the well-qualified Justice Sotomayor is evidence that change is on the way" (Hartford Courant, 8/7).

~ San Diego Union-Tribune: Sotomayor was confirmed despite being labeled by the opposition as a "racist," "judicial activist" and a "token" nominee selected "solely because of her race and gender," the editorial says. "Hopefully, this experience has served to remind the American people, once again, that talent and hard work pay off and that success stories come in all colors and backgrounds," it adds, concluding that Sotomayor "has an already remarkably successful life story that now begins a new chapter" (San Diego Union-Tribune, 8/7).

~ San Francisco Chronicle: Sotomayor has "proved that she has the experience, the temperament and the wisdom to be a Supreme Court justice," the editorial says. The Senate confirmation hearings "showed the American public that whatever Sotomayor's weaknesses may be, she's unassailable when it comes to what really counts: the quality of her legal work," it continues. It is "disappointing" that "so many" Senate Republicans voted against her confirmation, because "instead of voting 'yes' for competence, they're voting 'no' to please the most rabid elements of their base," the editorial concludes (San Francisco Chronicle, 8/6).

~ Washington Post: While the senators who opposed Sotomayor based on some of her previous legal decisions "were within their rights to dislike the outcomes," they were "wrong to overlook the fact that in each of these cases, Judge Sotomayor either followed settled law or appropriately exercised judgment that was well within the mainstream," the editorial says. The Post says that it "hope[s] that any justice would come to the bench free of personal prejudice or agenda" and that she "would follow the law faithfully even while understanding that she will often be called on to exercise judgment to ensure that cramped interpretations don't defy common sense and crowd out justice." Sotomayor "has done this for the past 17 years," the editorial says, adding, "We trust that Justice Sotomayor will continue to follow this humble and honorable path" (Washington Post, 8/7).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations