Legal News

More, More, More on You-Know-Who

By Ashby Jones

The avalanche of news and commentary on Sonia Sotomayor just keeps on keepin’ on. Was it like this shortly after the nominations of either Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Alito? Perhaps it was, though we don’t remember the coverage being quite as, uh, robust. In any event, we digress. Here’s the morning’s roundup on Judge Sotomayor, which we’re struggling to find a name for. (The Daily Sauce on Sonia? Ugh.)

How’d We Get Here? The NYT has a fascinating page-one story on the White House’s search. Things we didn’t know: That the “search” began well before Justice Souter announced his retirement; that 75-page memoranda were produced on each of a handful of potential nominees (one of which so engrossed President Obama that he missed a basketball game); and that a stern message was given to liberal activist groups to avoid badmouthing potential candidates.

From the beginning, however, the honor was Sotomayor’s to lose: “She had a compelling life story, Ivy League credentials and a track record on the bench. She was a Latina. She was a woman. She checked ‘each of the grids,’” said a White House official.

Sotomayor, the Legal Realist? Is there a philosophical underpinning to Judge Sotomayor’s jurisprudence? Possibly, writes the WSJ’s Jess Bravin. In the past, Sotomayor has cited favorably a Second Circuit predecessor, Jerome Frank, who largely introduced the notion of “legal realism” with his 1930 book “Law and the Modern Mind.”

In the book, Judge Frank argued that the law was less a science than people supposed — that, in reality, it reflected the personal characteristics of those applying it. Judge Sotomayor has said she agreed with this, and that perspective is riling conservatives opposed to her nomination. “Our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions,” Judge Sotomayor said at a now-famous talk she gave at the University of California, Berkeley in 2001. “The aspiration to impartiality is just that-it’s an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others.”

Can’t Stand the Heat? Well, Maybe She Can: How will Sotomayor hold up during her confirmation hearings? Perhaps better than one might expect, writes the Washington Post, given that she’s no stranger to rigorous questioning. “Sotomayor’s 1997 hearing . . . does hint at what senators can expect from Sotomayor. She came across as a self-confident jurist who enjoys speaking about her humble roots, discusses legal reasoning in accessible language and is adept at tactfully defending controversial positions.”

Could Souter’s Departure Mean Cameras in the Court? The National Law Journal’s Tony Mauro writes in Thursday’s USA Today that Souter’s departure could hasten the introduction of cameras in the court, which would, Mauro argues, help foster public awareness of what the Court does — something Souter has said he publicly supports.

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on May 28, 2009 (boomark / email).