QUICK FACTS: Politics, News, Economy, Religion, History…for busy people!


Posted by FactReal on July 14, 2009

Updated by FactReal on July 16, 2009

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor was born in New York from Puerto Rican parents. Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens by birth, so Sotomayor is not the typical Hispanic immigrant but that hasn’t stopped her from exploiting her “Latinismo” & Americans’ white guilt to advance her career.
She is a Judge at the Court of Appeals, but there are many instances were she has chosen to ignore the law.
1) ACTIVIST JUDGE: (making law from the bench instead of interpreting it)
“Court of Appeals is where policy is made”
said Sotomayor at Duke University Law School in 2005
Here is a judge who chooses to ignore the Separation of Powers: *U.S. Courts is where law is interpreted. *All legislative Powers belong to Congress
Judicial Activism (judges making law) is damaging to USA: It undermines the Constitution and substitutes judicial whim for democratic decision-making. Unelected judges, answerable to no one but themselves and serving for life, can all too easily become dangerous oligarchs.
Unconstitutionality: Sotomayor’s assertion is against the 200 years of American legal tradition that states that courts are merely meant to interpret existing law and not make policy/law.
An honest moment: For a moment she allows us to see what she really thinks. But when she remembers that she is being videotaped, she tries to fix it, “I know this is on tape, and I should never say that, because we don’t make law.” Then she patronizes, “I’m not promoting it, and I’m not advocating it. I’m—you know.” Why leftist love to hide that they are leftist? Because they know that Americans reject marxism.
2) RACIST: (Yes, a Latina can be a racist too)
She was published by the
marxist Berkeley La Raza Law Journal

La Raza Law Journal - Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor Speech - "Wise Latina"
‘El pueblo unido jamás será vencido’
(The people united will never be defeated) reads La Raza’s website heading. It is the title of a marxist song
which became a repeated marxist slogan.
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life”
said Sotomayor in her 2001 speech, “A Latina Judge’s Voice” at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law for the Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture

She gave multiple “Wise Latina” speeches (see below)

*Could a white American say that white men make better decisions than black women?
*Americans must free themselves from the white guilt which is still being exploited by people like Sonia Sotomayor to advance their career & destroy USA.
*Americans must stopped the leftists’ racial imputation with facts: The racism came from the Democrat Party
*Leftists love identity politics. Democrat Sen. Durbin accused white male judges of being racists

She gave multiple “Wise Latina” speeches: (Hat tip: VerumSerum)
– October 2003 speech at Seton Hall University
– In 2002, her speech was published by the marxist Berkeley La Raza Law Journal [13 Berkeley La Raza L.J. 87 (2002)] a symposium issue entitled “Raising the Bar: Latino and Latina Presence in the Judiciary and the Struggle for Representation.”
-In April 1999 before the Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York
-On 3 other occasions in 1999 & 2000 during two addresses at Yale and one at the City University of New York School of Law
-In 1994 in Puerto Rico

Racial & Sexual differences make some better? Judge Sotomayor seems to think that inherent racial and sexual differences are not simply quirks of genetics, but make some better than others.
-She also accepted as potentially valid the idea that the “different perspectives” of “men and women of color” are due to “basic differences in logic in reasoning” due to “inherent physiological or cultural differences.”
-She is not talking about experience. She is saying that being Latina makes you better equipped to make “better decisions” than a white men.
A judge’s personal experiences are license to impose her preferences thru judicial power? “It is one thing to recognize that judges, as people, are fallible and imperfect… It is quite another to suggest that such neutrality and objectivity is not even an ideal to which judges should aspire…” What would happen to Americans if all judges follow her belief that “some perspectives are “better” — more authentic, more fair, more progressive” and decide to “abandon any pretense of trying to apply the law in a neutral fashion?”
Impartiality is a disservice? In the same 2001 speech cited above, Sotomayor wondered “whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society.” Does Sotomayor believe that following the judges’ oath of office is a disservice to society? Does she believe that she is doing a disservice to the law if she impartially discharges her duties in a completely impartial manner?

A) Member of radical organization La Raza (“the Race”):
According the American Bar Association, Sotomayor is a member of the National Council Of La Raza (NCLR)
-La Raza also has connections to groups that advocate the separation of several southwestern states from the rest of America.
-A radical “pro-illegal immigration lobbying organization that supports racist groups calling for the secession of the western United States as a Hispanic-only homeland.”
-La Raza supports the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan – which sees “the Race” as part of an ethnic group that one day will reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas.
10 things about ‘La Raza’ (The Race)
B) Served on the board of LatinoJustice PRLDEF
One of the racial grievance groups that helped to sink the judicial nomination of Honduran-born Miguel Estrada in 2003. Why did they oppose Estrada? He was not a lefty.
-This group receives funding from marxist George Soros’s Open Society Institute and from Carnegie Corporation of New York ($1,025,000 since 2000), Ford Foundation ($2,280,000 since 2001), Rockefeller Foundation ($1,275,000 since 2000), and JPMorganChase Foundation ($70,000 since 2001).
-It’s agenda is identity politics: it pushes for enforced multiculturalism, diversity, bilingual public education, race-based gerrymandering of electoral districts, race-based employment quotas, tenants’ rights, and illegal immigrants’ rights.
-LatinoJustice PRLDEF was known as the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund
C) Member of the discriminatory women’s club, Belizean Grove
-The openly expressed purpose of this organization is to create a female elite
-Sotomayor chose to make the preposterous argument that the Belizean Grove isn’t a women’s club. It’s just that no men have ever applied for membership, you see. White clubs used to explain the absence of black members the same way.
-It’s discrimination against ordinary women who aren’t successful, or powerful or connected, who haven’t risen through the meritocracy.
-How could a Judge (who throughout her career & college days wanted equality) belong to a club that discriminates men and non-elite women?
-Ok to discriminate white Americans? “A corporation’s minority recruitment program or a university’s minority scholarships are considered admirable, while similar programs reserved for white people would be regarded as horrific.”
4) FAVORS REVERSE DISCRIMINATION: (No “empathy” for whites)
In the case of Ricci v. DeStefano: Judge Sotomayor ruled against the white firefighters & one hispanic who passed an exam for promotions in the fire department but were denied promotion because no blacks scored high enough.
No empathy to non-blacks: Although Obama wanted a judge with “empathy,” Judge Sotomayor did not show empathy to the white & hispanic firefighters. One of the white firefighters denied promotion, Frank Ricci, is dyslexic. In order to ace the promotion exam, he quit a second job, spent $1,000 for instruction materials, and spent many hours reading those books into an audio tape to help him study. For his extraordinary efforts, he finished sixth out of 77 applicants for promotion – but then was denied, simply because he is white.
No reference to constitutional claim: Second Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jose Cabranes, appointed by a Democratic president, complained that the ruling written by Judge Sotomayor and two other judges “contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case.”
She was chastised by fellow Clinton-appointee Jose Cabranes: Judge Sotomayor’s panel heard a case raising important questions under Title VII and equal protection law, but attempted to dispose of the firefighter’s arguments in a summary order, until called out by Judge Cabranes (on Page 9).
Court’s shenanigans: People were dismayed by the court’s “apparent shenanigans,” which were motivated by a desire to avoid Supreme Court review of the case. Whatever the motive, the actions of the original panel, the failure to handle an issue of this significance in a published opinion in particular, are highly questionable.
The Supreme Court reversed her decision on the Ricci case in a 5-4 decision

“I am the perfect affirmative action baby” gleefully said Sotomayor
“My test scores were not comparable to that of my colleagues
at Princeton or Yale”
She was accepted to Princeton and Yale despite her lackluster test performance compared to other applicants.

Sotomayor benefited herself from preferential treatment & exploited her “latinism”
Although she was born in New York with Puerto Ricans parents (who are U.S. citizens by birth). So, she does not fit exactly the migrant profile, but that did not stop her from exploiting it:

As a student, she played a role in the hiring of a dean at Princeton & imposed her ANTI-WHITE views

  • Letter to the Editor: Anti-Latino discrimination at Princeton, The Daily Princetonian, 5/10/1974
  • Letter to the Editor: Criticizing the process of selecting a ‘minority dean,’ The Daily Princetonian, 9/12/1974
    -A high number of her decisions have been overruled by higher courts.
    -Sotomayor’s record shows “she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court,” said Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network
    She has been reversed/scolded in the majority of her cases before SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The US):
    * Ricci v. DeStefano 530 F.3d 87 (2008) – SCOTUS reversed the ruling Sotomayor’s panel on a 5-4 vote.
    * Riverkeeper, Inc. vs. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007) – SCOTUS reversed Sotomayor’s ruling in a 6-3 decision. * * Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch, 395 F.3d 25 (2005) – reversed 8-0 (unanimously overturned Sotomayor’s ruling)
    * Correctional Services Corp.v. Malesko, 299 F.3d 374 (2001) – reversed 5-4.
    * Tasini vs. New York Times, et al, 972 F. Supp. 804 (1997) – reversed 7-2.
    * Knight vs. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2006) – upheld but unanimously rejected her reasoning. The Supreme Court upheld Sotomayor’s decision but unanimously rejected the reasoning she adopted, saying that her approach “flies in the face of the statutory language.”
    * Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. vs. McVeigh, 396 F.3d 136 (2005) affirmed on a 5-4 vote.
    Before the SCOTUS reversal in the Ricci v. DeStephano, Sotomayor had been reversed 60% by high court

    No Empathy for business
    Of the seven of the cases in which her decisions have been reversed or rejected by the Supreme Court (out of the eight total that the Supreme Court has reviewed), six concern business law…those cases suggests that Sotomayor harbors antipathy for businesses.

    She would not qualify as a Juror.
    The standard instruction to juror states:

    You have two duties as a jury. Your first duty is to decide the facts from the evidence in the case. This is your job, and yours alone. Your second duty is to apply the law that I give you to the facts. You must follow these instructions, even if you disagree with them…. Perform these duties fairly and impartially. Do not allow sympathy, prejudice, fear, or public opinion to influence you. You should not be influenced by any person’s race, color, religion, national ancestry, or sex.

    8) She will be lying if she takes the oath:
    According to Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code, each Supreme Court Justice takes the following oath:

    “I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

    9) More
    -Does she favor international law over U.S. law?
    -Her views on abortion
    -Her views on gun rights
  • Supreme Court Nominations, present-1789

  • Sotomayor’s documents submitted to the Senate

  • The Judicial Oath vs Sonia Sotomayor

  • Sotomayor’s Self-Contradictions
  • Sotomayor made disturbing statements about the role of judges as policymakers
  • Obama Picks Sonia Sotomayor for Court
  • Sotomayor Doesn’t Live Up to Obama’s Word, or here
  • NYT: Sonia Sotomayor Has a ‘Compelling Life Story’ — Clarence Thomas Didn’t?
  • Ed Meese on Sotomayor
  • Sotomayor’s and Obama’s Identity Politics Leave Blind Justice at Risk: Can Sotomayor keep her biases in check?
    For the Constitution’s sake, we’d better find out
  • Sotomayor: States Can Deny 2nd Amdmt
  • Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court senorita: A case of unapologetic racism
  • Senators must contest Sotomayer’s view that empathy, ethnicity can overrule law
  • Circumnavigating the Rule of Law
  • Don’t Forget Sotomayor’s “Inherent Physiological or Cultural Differences”
  • Would Sotomayor overturn Roe?
  • A Tale of Two Kids from the Projects
  • Cue the laugh track: Sotomayor ‘saved’ baseball
  • Would all parties receive fair treatment from Justice Sotomayor?
  • What If Sotomayor Were White?
  • Sonia Souter Left
  • Sonia Sotomayor Taney
  • MarkLevinShow.com
  • Flashback: Sotomayor Ruled Against Teen Blogger in ‘D-Bag Case’
  • Obama’s Ideas for a Radical Court
  • Sotomayor-matters

  • Advertisements


    1. […] SENATOR GRAHAM: “Obama won…” so I’ll be his lapdog & vote for Kagan, Sotomayor, etc. – Why Sonia Sotomayor is bad for America Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)She’s almost there.Pete Hegseth: Kagan […]

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


    Connecting to %s