As long as she follows the letter of the law who cares what her personal beliefs are. So far she seems pretty balanced to me

The rantings continue...............................

Sotomayor actuallly smirked and winked during a Duke University interview!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Michelle Obama brazenly exposes her arms and shoulders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama orders a cheeseburger without ketchup!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Someone continues to scream at the mirror in Grass Valley!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OP. You sure like to hurl insults toward Sotomayor.

She's written something like 400+ opinions, yet you continue to manufacture attacks against her.

Surely with 400+ opinions written, you can do some research from her writings and come up with say half a dozen cases where she has legislated from the bench.

Chrishamm... that is the problem... Legislated from the bench... To me that means that she did not follow the Law, she made her own law. Do we really want Judges who do that?

Mitchell. Anytime there is no previous legal precedent, anytime the law is not crystal clear, anytime the Constitution is not 100% clear to an emerging legal issue, judges are required to apply judgement of course. When they do they establish an opinion. That is not legislating from the bench. Scalia himself if you read some previous references this and actually supports this.

Them's the facts. In essence the Judge's are doing their jobs. Their decisions or opinions are always subject to review by a higher court of course.

Of course we don't want a Judge or Justice to ignore precedent, or to ignore the written law or the spirit of the law. We have a system of checks and balances.

When a Judge or Justice makes a judgment call and someone likes it, then there are no complaints. When the judgment call is disliked, it's legislating from the bench.

Mitchell,

In what case did Justice Sotomayor "legislate from the bench?"

Can any one of you from the extremes left and right tell us with total certainty that if you were sitting in the Supreme Court that you would be totally objective and not be influenced by your personal beliefs? If anyone answers yes, I will call them a liar. We are all human and try as we may we will always be subjective, even while interpreting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Now, take a deep breath, turn the computer off and try to have a great weekend, things will work out fine, we will not be overrun by the Chinese or the No. Koreans, The President will not declare that the Country is now Communist.

Relax, life is good if you try to make it so.

LR. You forgot the middle of the road......................... :)

I view single cell organisms all the same and thusly we shouldn't use clorox 409 on counter tops because it will kill them all!

skimammoth,

That makes sense. I don't trim my hair or clip my nails for fear of discarding living human cells.

Some people actually believe that a sky-god raped and abandoned a human virgin and she bore his son who grew up to be a magician and terrorist who was executed and then turned into a zombie who flew up into the sky where he still lives as a god to this day foreverandevertheend. Obviously, I'm speaking of the great god Mithras.

It's funny that same story was also told two other times more than 600 years before Christ. I guess that story lost it's originality about 3500 years ago.

This is the kind of politicking that hurts everyone. The left plays it better than anyone, but the Republicans do, too. I haven’t read anything about her yet that sets off any alarms. Yes, she may be a little prejudice, but I think she’ll be better than Souter, (spelling). My Father-in-law went to Souter’s house and said it was disgusting. He won’t even kill a bug. I don’t think Souter has been playing with a full deck for a long time.

P50: I hope you're right.

I hope so, too.