Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Judging Judge Sotomayor
Some early libertarian reactions to Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.
Roger Pilon, the Cato Institute's Director of Constitutional Studies:
In nominating Second Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor to fill the seat of retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter, President Obama chose the most radical of all the frequently mentioned candidates before him.
Ilya Somin, George Mason University Law School:
I am also not favorably impressed with her notorious statement 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." Not only is it objectionable in and of itself, it also suggests that Sotomayor is a committed believer in the identity politics school of left-wing thought.
Dave Kopel, Research Director at the Independence Institute:
Judge Sotomayor's record suggests hostility, rather than empathy, for the tens of millions of Americans who exercise their right to keep and bear arms.
William Redpath, National Committee Chairman of the Libertarian Party:
By nominating Sonia Sotomayor, Barack Obama has made it clear he prefers an activist for his personal causes over a rational interpreter of law.
Xeones|5.26.09 @ 1:38PM|#
You mean Barack Obama nominated someone who is hostile to small-government and individualist philosophies? Who'da thunk it?
Ben Kenobi|5.26.09 @ 1:38PM|#
Obama is clearly racist for not nominating the black Janice Rogers Brown. Why does Obama hate black women?
Waiting on the sweet release o|5.26.09 @ 1:43PM|#
Why does Obama hate black women?
They give much better head than he does.
IceTrey|5.26.09 @ 1:46PM|#
Is any judge nominated by a Repub or Dem ever going to be satisfactory to the libertarians? No.
Xeones|5.26.09 @ 1:53PM|#
has there even BEEN a Hispanic female libertarian
yet?
I heard there was one down in Orlando once, but it turned out she
just had a tan.
BFair|5.26.09 @ 1:54PM|#
"Is any judge nominated by a Repub or Dem ever going to be
satisfactory to the libertarians? No."
This statement is absolutely correct. However, some are less
satisfactory than others. Rhenquist, Thomas and Scalia are better
than Bush appointees Roberts and Alito and better than Clinton's
Breyer. Janice Rogers Brown (nominated by Bush) would be preferable
to anyone on Obama's short list. Kathleen Sullivan or Dianne Wood,
while highly objectionable, would be more acceptable to
libertarians than someone who brags that the courts are where
policy is made.
I hope that Rosen's profile, depicting Sotomayor as not as smart as
she's made out to be, pans out. She'll be nominated, but if she's
sufficiently bloodied by that time, her influence on the court can
be minimized and perhaps she'll retire early.
|5.26.09 @ 1:54PM|#
I've decided to start a "when will Obama do something that isn't utterly noxious" watch. I expect that it will go on...indefinitely.
The Chad|5.26.09 @ 1:56PM|#
It almost sounds like these people are surprised that Obama would pick someone like this.
|5.26.09 @ 2:01PM|#
I don't think they're surprised, The Chad. But they have to show contempt where it is warranted, not only because it's warranted on libertarian grounds, but also to give a little bitch slap to the libertarians who thought Obama wouldn't be that bad, some of whom not only spoke favorably of him but also voted for him.
|5.26.09 @ 2:01PM|#
"Rhenquist, Thomas and Scalia are better than Bush appointees
Roberts and Alito and better than Clinton's Breyer. Janice Rogers
Brown (nominated by Bush) would be preferable to anyone on Obama's
short list. Kathleen Sullivan or Dianne Wood, while highly
objectionable, would be more acceptable to libertarians than
someone who brags that the courts are where policy is made."
I've never cared much about Rhenquist and Scalia from a libertarian
standpoint. They were much too socially conservative.
Xeones|5.26.09 @ 2:04PM|#
Epi: it can't last longer than January of 2016. Then we'll have
some new noxious toad in the White House to complain about. Cheer
up!
Warty, i said "heard about," not "met." And no.
|5.26.09 @ 2:05PM|#
"Is any judge nominated by a Repub or Dem ever going to be
satisfactory to the libertarians? No."
This statement is absolutely correct. However, some are less
satisfactory than others. Rhenquist, Thomas and Scalia are better
than Bush appointees Roberts and Alito and better than Clinton's
Breyer. Janice Rogers Brown (nominated by Bush) would be preferable
to anyone on Obama's short list. Kathleen Sullivan or Dianne Wood,
while highly objectionable, would be more acceptable to
libertarians than someone who brags that the courts are where
policy is made.
Even though Libertarians like to claim that Democrats and
Republicans are the same, when it comes to SCOTUS, the Democrats
are completely anti-liberty. Coercion is all they know. Clarence
Thomas is quite libertarian and, on his better days but not always,
so is Scalia. I concede that they are not Libertarians, but they
are closer than ANY democrat nominees.
Xeones|5.26.09 @ 2:07PM|#
Scalia, Marshall? Mr. New Professionalism himself? His better days must come rarely indeed.
|5.26.09 @ 2:08PM|#
"Even though Libertarians like to claim that Democrats and
Republicans are the same, when it comes to SCOTUS, the Democrats
are completely anti-liberty. Coercion is all they know. Clarence
Thomas is quite libertarian and, on his better days but not always,
so is Scalia. I concede that they are not Libertarians, but they
are closer than ANY democrat nominees."
But when it comes to social freedoms, Democrats are usually better
than Republicans.
|5.26.09 @ 2:13PM|#
X, you met a libertarian chick?? Was she hot?
They exist, Warty, and even can be hot. But they won't go near
toads like you.
I'm sorry, that was cruel. They won't go near toads like
you...without significant financial impetus.
Warty|5.26.09 @ 2:15PM|#
without significant financial impetus.
Date-rate drugs are cheap, Epi. You of all people should know
that.
|5.26.09 @ 2:20PM|#
Date-rate drugs are cheap, Epi. You of all people should
know that.
You should be better at spelling "rape", seeing as all you know is
"ball" and "good"...and "rape".
And yes, ecstasy is relatively cheap, but coke isn't. And Special
K...that's hard to come by nowadays.
Xeones|5.26.09 @ 2:20PM|#
Uh... Warty, date-rape drugs are a sore point with Epi since that time he woke up tied spread-eagled to MNG's canopy bed, wearing nothing but wax drippings.
Scott Bieser|5.26.09 @ 2:22PM|#
What with all his recent moves re Afghanistan and "extended detention," and civil liberties in general, Obama needs to shore up his base. This nomination accomplishes that.
|5.26.09 @ 2:31PM|#
has there even BEEN a Hispanic female libertarian yet?
Professor Lydia Ortega, Chair of Economics, San Jose State
University.
|5.26.09 @ 2:36PM|#
One more proverbial straw on the camel back of Constitutional guarantees of freedom and the rule of law. Now we will have non-binding SCOTUS rulings, due to the illegal alien usurper having appointed a SC Justice. His lack of proof of eligibility to hold the office will make the can of worms of corruption only bigger. Looks like we no longer have a republic but rule by fait accompli. America is toast.
|5.26.09 @ 2:44PM|#
Now we will have non-binding SCOTUS rulings, due to the
illegal alien usurper having appointed a SC Justice.
Wheeeeeee!
|5.26.09 @ 2:50PM|#
Now we will have non-binding SCOTUS rulings, due to the
illegal alien usurper having appointed a SC Justice.
Oh, you dittoheads are so adorable.
Xeones|5.26.09 @ 2:53PM|#
Hey Phil, no offense, but you should probably be on some kind of medication.
E.H. Munro|5.26.09 @ 2:54PM|#
"America is toast."
America was toast as of June 1788. All that's happened since is a
slow burning. I think we were officially bread crumbs by the time
that George Bush I showed up.
|5.26.09 @ 2:59PM|#
"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."
It's nice to know that racism is not solely the province of "white
males".
|5.26.09 @ 3:04PM|#
This "Scalia and Thomas are good for liberty" bullshit is just comical. Did you guys come to this conclusion before or after Scalia whined about disallowing governments to police people's sexual habits?
Pat|5.26.09 @ 3:06PM|#
"America was toast as of June 1788. All that's happened since is
a slow burning. I think we were officially bread crumbs by the time
that George Bush I showed up."
All of our current troubles can be traced back to an unenlightened
immigration policy on the part of the American Indian.
|5.26.09 @ 3:13PM|#
"a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences..."
Did she recommend any?
And... Alicia Clark is either Latina, or she punked us something
fierce with her Ricky Ricardo impression.
|5.26.09 @ 3:47PM|#
Scalia, Marshall? Mr. New Professionalism himself? His
better days must come rarely indeed.
While I can't think of any at the moment, I thought that Scalia
occasionally made some rather libertarian arguments. He dissented
in Kelo, didn't he? I didn't mean he was a Libertarian, just that
he got it right occasionally.
Tomas Estrada-Palma|5.26.09 @ 4:45PM|#
Who cares who he nominates. They will be corrupted before ever arriving inside the beltway.
|5.26.09 @ 4:46PM|#
Scalia wrote the majority opinion in the Kyllo
case in 2001, which found that a heat detector allowed police
to see things they otherwise could not and that the police could
not use one to get probable cause for a search warrant.
He was joind by Thomas, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer.
Up until and including Kyllo I kind of liked Scalia but I must
confess I have found him disappointing since. Except on Kelo, of
course.
|5.26.09 @ 4:51PM|#
He chose a liberal judge? Shocking. Simply shocking.
Please, keep us appraised of all the most glaringly obvious. I rely
on you to stay informed.
Tomas Estrada-Palma|5.26.09 @ 5:46PM|#
All the Supreme Court does these days is tell individuals what they can't do anymore and what the government can do to us from now onward. They are traitors too. They are fortunate to live in such ignorant times or they would be wearing tar and feather suits!
|5.27.09 @ 6:41PM|#
"Obama is clearly racist for not nominating the black Janice
Rogers Brown. Why does Obama hate black women?"
Have you seen Michelle? She has a bigger adam's apple than Barak
does.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245