A not-so-wise Latina and the Supreme Court dilemma

January 15, 2022
By

“It has long, however, been my opinion, and I have never shrunk from its expression,… that the germ of dissolution of our Federal Government is in the Constitution of the Federal Judiciary — an irresponsible body, (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow,) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step, like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the Government of all be consolidated into one.”  Thomas Jefferson, 18 August, 1821 in a letter to Mr. C. Hammond

“…The candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government, upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made… the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having, to that extent, practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”  Abraham Lincoln first inaugural address, 4 March, 1861

“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,”  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit judge Sonia Sotomayor in a speech at the University of California Berkley law school in 2001.

“The fault I have with your speech is…you don’t say that that’s what you need this information for. You say, if there are enough of us, we will make a difference, inferring that it is a good thing if we begin deciding cases differently.”  Senator Jon Kyle (R-AZ) on Sotomayor’s “clarification” of her 2001 comment during her 2009 confirmation hearing for the Supreme Court.

“We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition and many on ventilators,”  Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor during oral arguments on the Biden administration’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) vaccine mandates, January 7, 2022.

Some of you might be asking yourselves about now, “why in the world did Caldwell, just take up half a column with nothing but quotes”? The answer is simply: Context

First the context of the danger that the author of the Declaration of Independence and this nation’s third President and its sixteenth who saved this union saw in the dangers of unelected and basically unremovable judges allowing their own personal beliefs to undermine the greatest document human civilization has ever known; the United States Constitution.

Second context of no matter how smart one must be to sit on the Supreme Court it provides no guarantee against spewing blatant falsehoods.

And context that for me illustrates Justice Sotomayor failing on both.

For argument’s sake, let’s assume the 100,000 number was correct. Even that horrific number has nothing to do with whether there is Constitutional authority for the Executive branch to use the regulatory process to bypass the authority of the Legislative branch. The question was an emotional, not Constitutional one. One that could only come from a place of “richness of her experiences” rather than the duty to judge strictly based on constitutionality.

No one wants even one child to suffer under any circumstance. But it is not the court’s job to rule on emotion, it’s the courts job to rule on the constitution. And if this Republic is to survive, those rulings must be sans emotion and strictly rule of law.

Second is simply a “what did I just hear?”. How in the world does a sitting Supreme Court Justice allow herself to be so glaringly misinformed that she would utter such a fantastical claim into the historical record of the court?

In this columnist’s opinion it’s simply because her mind is already made up. Forget the constitutionality of said mandates, “there’s a public health crisis, this is how my politically aligned Biden administration has chosen to deal with it, so therefore it must be upheld.”

Add in that CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki have both refused to directly address Justice Sotomayor’s false claim when specifically asked and you’ve definitely got at least one vote on the Supreme Court that the administration doesn’t want to upset by acknowledging the falsity of the claim.

A claim that even the usual cadre of liberal fact checkers have been forced to admit was off the charts untrue.

And lest you think this is about Sotomayor alone, think again. This is only about the latest example of the politicized robe ruling from the bench that Jefferson and Lincoln both warned of.

Tis merely the most recent of many before it and what somehow must be stopped if this Republic is to survive beyond our current political turmoil.

Tags: , , , , ,

Comments are closed.

Calendar

May 2022
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Archives

Search