One of the questions that have arisen following the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court is that why President Obama didn't pick a liberal version of Antonin Scalia.
No one is questioning that Judge Sotomayor is probably left of center but few believe she is as left as Scalia is right. In fact Peter Baker of the New York Times pointed out that in reviewing potential judges "Favorites of the Left Don't Make Obama's Court List."
"It has been more than 40 years since a Democratic president appointed someone who truly excited the left, but Mr. Obama appears to be following President Bill Clinton’s lead in choosing someone with more moderate sensibilities."
This leaves many on the left wondering why conservatives were able to appoint extremists like Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist yet Democrats appoint judges like Breyer, Ginsburg and Sotomayor.
One reason is the double standard that exist in appointments. Conservatives are able to appoint extreme conservatives as long as they aren't total extremists (i.e. Bork) while appointing anyone more than slightly left of center will bring the wrath of conservatives down upon them, threatening to harm their presidency.
Already fringe groups on the right have started the attack. In Politico, the Judicial Confirmation Network claimed she was a favorite of far-left special interest groups. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee claimed "she comes from the far left.”
In reality there is a little concern that she isn't the liberal judge that conservatives claim she is and that it would have been nice to appoint the liberal Scalia.
Except that if one really think about it would they really want a liberal Scalia? A judge whose opinions range from the bizarre to the nonseniscal? Do liberal want a judge they could be proud and who uses logic and law to form opinions or a judge who has given up on thinking?
No comments:
Post a Comment