Recently in supreme court Category

Sotomayor.jpg

1. The court needs balance.

2. Roberts, Scalia and Thomas think they are the holy trinity.

3. Appellate courts make policy. Everyone knows that.

4. She is smart.

5. She is 55. She will be on the bench as long as Roberts.

6. She can see Yankees stadium from her house.

7. She will give Jeff Sessions a heart attack.

8. She can teach everyone to salsa.

9. Republicans think she's a racist.

10. Karl Rove thinks she isn't very smart. Harriet Myers, anyone?

May 27, 2009 / category: supreme court / link / comments (0)
U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis today issued the following statement on President Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States:

"I applaud President Obama's choice to nominate Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court. Today's announcement demonstrates the president's commitment to bring greater diversity of thought, perspective and experience to the nation's legal system. The daughter of working-class Puerto Rican parents, Judge Sotomayor grew up in public housing reading Nancy Drew books, which sparked her interest in the law profession.

"Driven by her mother's belief in the power of education and her own unrelenting work ethic, Sotomayor excelled in school, winning a scholarship to Princeton University, where she graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. She then entered Yale Law School, where she served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal.

"She embodies the characteristics that President Obama has said he is looking for -- a qualified nominee with legal and real-world experience, as well as an appreciation for the impact of court decisions on everyday life. Her journey in life has truly been extraordinary and should serve as an inspiration to all Americans. I trust that her nomination will move as swiftly as possible and she will be seated as the first Hispanic to the highest court in our nation."

Source: U.S. Department of Labor

May 26, 2009 / category: supreme court / link / comments (0)
The nomination of Second Circuit Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court is a slap at gun rights and the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

Judge Sotomayor, a New York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo. This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nordyke v. King case in California that the Second Amendment is incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

"While Democrats in Congress have been making great strides in the gun rights arena, refusing to consider a renewal of the Clinton gun ban, and offering overwhelming bipartisan support for legislation allowing citizens to carry firearms in national parks, President Obama just demonstrated that he prefers judges who oppose Second Amendment rights," said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb.

Incorporation may be taken up by the high court during its next session beginning in October, because attorneys in the Maloney case plan to appeal in late June.

"If the Maloney appeal is accepted by the Supreme Court," Gottlieb wondered, "would Justice Sotomayor - provided she is confirmed - recuse herself from deliberations?"

Judge Sotomayor has written an opinion that declined to order the release of certain information under the Freedom of Information Act. In one case, according to SCOTUSblog, she wrote that the "unwarranted invasion of privacy" for individuals whose names would be released under an FOIA request outweighed the public interest.

"Would a Justice Sotomayor be just as protective of the privacy rights of concealed carry permit holders if a newspaper wanted to publish that information?" Gottlieb asked. "We hope that during Senate confirmation hearings, someone asks about her positions on incorporation and the privacy rights of gun owners. The Second Amendment needs to be expanded, not eviscerated."

SOURCE Second Amendment Foundation

May 26, 2009 / category: supreme court / link / comments (0)

Sponsors