Political spectacle catches my eye

By Staff
Scot Beard
This week's Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor is, to me, as fascinating of a political event as last year's presidential election.
It is shaping up to be the biggest fight President Barack Obama has faced since taking office, even though his fellow democrats control the majority of Senate seats.
People view Sotomayor in one of two lights.
She is either the embodiment of a new America where race no longer matters or she is an incompetent judge with no business on the nation's highest court.
If the Senate confirms her appointment, Sotomayer will be only the third woman appointed to the court and the first Supreme Court Justice of Hispanic decent.
Democrats praise her as the most qualified Supreme Court nominee in more than a century, with plenty of previous experience as a judge.
Republicans condemn various speeches she has given over the years in which, they feel, Sotomayor showed bias towards one group of people over another group.
Both sides are right, and both sides are also wrong.
Sotomayor does hive quite a bit of experience as a judge. She has served as a judge on the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals since 1998 and was confirmed as a U.S. District Court judge 1992.
Sixteen years as a federal judge is impressive – until you look at her record of appeals.
The Supreme Court has reviewed seven of her rulings and reversed five of them. The reversals were not close either.
While two of the reversals were by vote of 5-4, the others were reversed by votes of 6-2, 7-2 and 8-0. That is impressive considering that many of the court's decisions these days are decided 5-4.
The two that were upheld were close. One was upheld with a vote of 5-4 and the other was upheld, but the Supreme Court agreed the reasoning behind the decision was faulty.
Yes, Sotomayor did hear more than seven cases during her tenure as a federal judge, but it is troubling that – of the cases that did go before the Supreme Court – so many of the rulings were reversed. This seems to indicate a lack of understanding of the law.
Republicans are also wrong in saying she is biased because of a speech she gave several years ago in which she said a Latina woman could give a better ruling than a white man.
The question is not "Is she biased?" Nobody is free of bias, because everybody is human.
The question is "Can she set her biases aside and rule in accordance to the law?"
That is what the Senators must assess during the confirmation hearings. They also must assess Sotomayor's qualifications along with her record.
It is not a decision I would want to make, but it is a process I will be following very closely. Almost as closely as the presidential election.
Hopefully the Senate will do what is best for the United States.