What a difference Big Media favoritism can make. It has been a long time since Big Media has offered up such glowing recommendations for a Supreme Court nominee. Perhaps if they had not already crowned Hillary Clinton with the title, Sonia Sotomayor just might be the "smartest woman in the world." Even without this accolade, however, Big Media paints their nominee as brilliant for her responses to this tough confirmation process.
Now this would be just peachyif it were not for Big Media's clear hypocrisy. Sotomayor is just glowingly brilliant for her abilities to not answer specific questions about potential future legal rulings. According to legal experts I have read, and judges I have heard, this is appropriate. How impartial can a judge be if he/she indicates predetermined judgments before hearing a case? So I can understand the nature of Sotomayor's answers and comments. (Although, I also comprehend that judges must rule on established law, so some cases are going to be pretty much predetermined anyway. And certainly Sotomayor could indicate clearly whether she is going to apply constitutional law or not, which is the point of the Supreme Court. Besides, I can probably already guess what her ruling is going to be on certain cases without her premature declarations. I doubt that her ideology is going to shift any moving from the Appellate Court to the Supreme Court.)
An Associated Press article from 7/15/09 reads, "The appeals court judge, 55, avoided weighing in on any major issue that could come before her as a justice, instead using legal doctrine, carefully worded deflections and even humor to ward off efforts to pin her down." Brilliant! Remarkable! Applaudable! What a judicial heroine we have on our hands.
Except - and here is where just a wee, tiny bit of hypocrisy creeps in - every Supreme Court justice nominee has necessarily done the same thing! As indicated by those in the system, it is the proper thing to do. Yet, when the most recent nominees have done it, Big Media has gone ballistic. "They're not qualified! They can't render legal decisions! They are incompetent! They won't answer a straight question!" Ad nauseum. But not this time. This time, the nominee is just brilliant as she deflects those specifics that should not be declared without a real case.
Amazing! Simply amazing!
Now this would be just peachyif it were not for Big Media's clear hypocrisy. Sotomayor is just glowingly brilliant for her abilities to not answer specific questions about potential future legal rulings. According to legal experts I have read, and judges I have heard, this is appropriate. How impartial can a judge be if he/she indicates predetermined judgments before hearing a case? So I can understand the nature of Sotomayor's answers and comments. (Although, I also comprehend that judges must rule on established law, so some cases are going to be pretty much predetermined anyway. And certainly Sotomayor could indicate clearly whether she is going to apply constitutional law or not, which is the point of the Supreme Court. Besides, I can probably already guess what her ruling is going to be on certain cases without her premature declarations. I doubt that her ideology is going to shift any moving from the Appellate Court to the Supreme Court.)
An Associated Press article from 7/15/09 reads, "The appeals court judge, 55, avoided weighing in on any major issue that could come before her as a justice, instead using legal doctrine, carefully worded deflections and even humor to ward off efforts to pin her down." Brilliant! Remarkable! Applaudable! What a judicial heroine we have on our hands.
Except - and here is where just a wee, tiny bit of hypocrisy creeps in - every Supreme Court justice nominee has necessarily done the same thing! As indicated by those in the system, it is the proper thing to do. Yet, when the most recent nominees have done it, Big Media has gone ballistic. "They're not qualified! They can't render legal decisions! They are incompetent! They won't answer a straight question!" Ad nauseum. But not this time. This time, the nominee is just brilliant as she deflects those specifics that should not be declared without a real case.
Amazing! Simply amazing!
No comments:
Post a Comment