Sotomayor on Roe, 'wise Latina'

Posted: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:11 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Congress, Courts

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell and Mark Murray
Answering a question from Democratic Sen. Herb Kohl, Sonia Sotomayor said "there is a right to privacy," and called Roe v. Wade "settled law." (Then again, conservative Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts also said Roe v. Wade is settled law during his confirmation hearing in 2005.)

In addition, under questioning by Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, Sotomayor backed away from her infamous "wise Latina" line, Politico writes. "After hearing two months of pointed attacks over her so-called “wise Latina” comments, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor publicly backed off the remarks Tuesday, describing them as 'a rhetorical flourish that fell flat.' 'It left an impression that life experience commanded a result in a case but that’s clearly not what I do as a judge,' Sotomayor said under questioning by Sen. Jeff Sessions..."

More: "'I was trying to play on her words. My play fell flat. It was bad,' Sotomayor said."

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Did I accidentally tune in to Fox & Friends this morning? That so-called "interview" of Liz Cheney was more a 45-minute infomercial w/ the feckless Mika licking Liz' pumps. Unbelievable. And at the end, Mika said "You know, I really like the way we did it today."
CA Indy (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 10:57 AM)
********************************

Spot on CA Indy!

Regarding Mika Mouses dismal performance on Morning Joke this morning… I’d be careful there Mika Mouse if I were you…

A staple of a Lizzard’s (Cheney) diet consists of small rodents… and that goes for you as well rabid rat!

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:17 AM)

I can't believe the national media keep referring to "racial bias" when it comes to Sotomayor's "wise Latina" comment. Being Hispanic is not a race, but an ethnicity, as the Census Bureau clearly recognizes. "Ethnic bias" is what they're talking about.

Marv Balousek, Oregon, Wis. (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:18 AM)

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell and Mark Murray
Answering a question from Democratic Sen. Herb Kohl, Sonia Sotomayor said "there is a right to privacy," and called Roe v. Wade "settled law." (Then again, conservative Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts also said Roe v. Wade is settled law during his confirmation hearing in 2005.)
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Sessions is really trying to push the envelope and I am pleased that Judge Sotomayor remained calm and professional and not play into his BS. Roe v. Wade is a privacy issue and has no place in confirmation hearings to do so is political and serves no purpose.

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:22 AM)

Settled law? Are Affirmitive Action laws "settled law" too? How about laws that says gays can't marry? Many states have that law. Is it "settled law"? What a dodge from the fraud.

Malcom R., NY NY (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:25 AM)

Has Sotomayer's husband walked out of the hearings in tears yet? You know, like when the Democrats "respectfully" question Republicans nominated candidates for the SC?

Tender Moments (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:27 AM)

"a rhetorical flourish that fell flat"

Sounds like feisty, anita, clara, cindy, eric, et al....

Keep the Change (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:27 AM)

FR: In addition, under questioning by Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, Sotomayor backed away from her infamous "wise Latina" line,

So how did she explain it away? Was she lying to herself when she said it?

And how about her "We make policy" statement?

This woman is a stooge.

Larry Curly Moe (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:29 AM)

Look, all she was saying is that diversity in the judiciary is beneficial as is diversity elsewhere in our society. Deal with it and move on.

John B, Des Moines, IA (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:32 AM)

The top 0.1% of taxpayers by income pay about 17% of all federal income taxes, the top 1% pay about 37%, and the top 5% pay about 57%. Oh, and the bottom 50% pay about 3%.

So it sure looks like the federal income tax structure is already quite progressive with evil rich people (and even not so rich people) carrying the vast bulk of the tax burden load. But now the clueless want to add to that burden. Makes no sense to continue to squeeze the most productive earners in our society in order to implement the extravagant visions of our socialist president. Bill, Fairfax, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:54 AM)
-----------------------------------------------------

The top 5% own 90% of the wealth in this country Bill...you want to belong to the club, you need to pay a premium. So 57% of the taxes is a discount...also 2/3rds of corporations pay no taxes at all, which is bunk. You try not paying your taxes and see what happens. They out and out evade taxes, through loopholes and creative accounting.

Back in the day the wealthiest paid capital gains of 80-90%...and we grew just fine. Why?? Because they were reinvesting to avoid those capital gains rather than taking the money and running (like today).

Greg P. NW Indiana

=================

I was told there wouldn't be any math.

JBiden, DL (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:33 AM)

Someone poke Leahy. He's nodded off again.

Pat Johnston, VT (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:34 AM)

"After hearing two months of pointed attacks over her so-called “wise Latina” comments, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor publicly backed off the remarks Tuesday, describing them as 'a rhetorical flourish that fell flat.' "

I'm amused at the irony of her wise retreat from that ill-concieved remark.

Bill, Fairfax, VA (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:34 AM)

Everyone is concerned about Sotomayor's stance on Roe v. Wade, which is a law. Isn't it hypocritical for pro lifer's like Chris Matthews {and Catholic) to impose their beliefs and assume they are right? What double standards.

Linda Brock, Crestview Hills, KY (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:34 AM)

While the racist republicans like Sessions continue to spew there hate for anyone that is not the same as them.Sessions has shown his true colors as his racist rants have been admitted to by Sessions.The guy is a wimp who hids behind his sheet wearing buddys,and the fear they spread thur the South.See there are still places in this country that the Hoodies control,and there home base is the same as Sessions.

jesse St Paul MN (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:34 AM)

again, I don't have a problem with the 'wise Latina' comment; my reasons are complicated and would take too long to spell out, but I don't see it as a 'racist' comment in the least.

I AM concerned with several of her rulings on different issues: eminent domain, where she ruled that municipalities have the right to take homes for the sole purpose of increasing tax ratables; second Amendment ruling that held that the Second Amendment guaranteed Federal, not state, rights-does that mean that OTHER amendments only confer Federal,not state rights? is my right to free speech,religious freedom, to vote, only guaranteed on federal lands, but not in my state?-and,yes, on the Ricci case. she wrote for the majority, but gave only a perfunctary, one paragraph explanation for the decision.

I am also somewhat taken aback by some words of praise lavished on the Judge, namely, that on appeals cases, she essentially retried the case from her chambers. this is not the role of an appeals court-its role is to judge whether or not the law was properly applied in the case at bar, not to re-evaluate the evidence used.

It is to these questions that I would like answers before I determine my stance on her qualifications for the supreme court.

no joe,no bo,nj (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:35 AM)

"'I was trying to play on her words. My play fell flat. It was bad,' Sotomayor said."

Sotomayor is just like the Obama administration and it's agenda. Here excuses are already spot-on! She'll fit right in.

LL Bonn, Obamaland (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:38 AM)

Crackerism alive and well in G.O.P.

The South will rise again (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:38 AM)

The stooges are certinally out in full force this morning. Keep the change; so gald you took time to
acknowledge us. Let's me know you are thinking about us and our comments land the blows intended.

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:39 AM)

I tried to respond yesterday but of course FR stopped updating.so here goes: yes the Constitution does provide for the implementation of national healthcare. please read section 8, as it says that the congress shall provide for the general welfare of the people. public option surely must be considered the good of the people. I have insurance but it stinks, I am no less a man than these elected officials and I think the middle class deserve the same coverage as them who are the wealthiest among us. healthcare should not be rich or poor-live, middle class die. Jonathan, if you really do live in flint then you have seen first hand the middle class devastation.

we are paying for free healthcare for iraq, coan we do no less for our own citizens??? we have spent between 1 and 2 trillion on that counrty. why are you not outraged at that? bush himself said he did not want to saddle iraq with debt but is it okay to saddle middle class America? there are NO programs for middle America, we just keep sending in our tax money.

obama could end some of the suffering overnight by issuing an executive order that ends the bush bankruptcy reform law(but of course biden voted for it). even hatch says it hurt more people than he thought possible. it led to the CC default crisis and the housing foreclosure crisis.
the middle class are so saddled with debt that they can no longer spend the nation back to health. I have personally bought my last new car of my life. for the remainder it will be clunkers all the way.

leon houston (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:39 AM)

Marv Balousek, Oregon, Wis. (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:18 AM)
----------------------------------------
When has logic ever been able to make a move into the spotlight? There is no controversy in the truth. But i admire and agree with your effort.

dan Austin, tx (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:43 AM)

The Constitution is a "Work in Progress"!

How could the framers, all white men, land and probably slave owners, have envisioned how this country would evolve.....the document is over 230 years old....

The native Americans/Indians were disenfranchised and killed. Slave trading/ownership was the "thing to do".......Women were also treated as second class citizens......

Nothing is ever settled completely!

Ed, San Antonio (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:44 AM)

L. Linke, Denver CO (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:46 AM)

Had to say this: the post on the prior topic from Elizabeth Teede sets a new standard for sanctimony: lecture the other side first and then do the same thing you're lecturing them about. Wow. But of course we know if Fox tells you it, it's not demagoguery, it's true.

Patriotic American (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:47 AM)

Roe vs Wade????
I believe that it is settled because choice is freedom. Freedom is what judges are there to protect. Women can and do make better decisions on this subject than any white man ever could. Anything to the contrary is just ignorance.
But I guess it wouldn't be politics if this subject wasn't thrown out every other day.

dan Austin, tx (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:48 AM)

"As in, it isn't. Or do you have proof otherwise?
L. Linke, Denver CO (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:46 AM)"

Read the speech in full and in context. It's available for you to read. Deal with it and move on.

John B, Des Moines, IA (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:52 AM)

Sessions is really trying to push the envelope and I am pleased that Judge Sotomayor remained calm and professional and not play into his BS. Roe v. Wade is a privacy issue and has no place in confirmation hearings to do so is political and serves no purpose.
Anita, Birmingham,

Ohh, poor, poor baby. Obviously you missed the Democrats questioning of Republicans appointed nominees. Alito, Roberts ring a bell in that little head of yours? Miguel Estrada? Remember him?

Liberals can't take the heat. They just cannot stand that someone disagrees with them or would have the audacity to ask them questions that will make them uncomfortable. Too bad. Get over it.

Liberals Are Babies (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:53 AM)

Look, all she was saying is that diversity in the judiciary is beneficial as is diversity elsewhere in our society. Deal with it and move on.
John B, Des Moines, IA

As in, it isn't. Or do you have proof otherwise?
L. Linke, Denver CO

"Diversity" is one of the biggest myths ever in the country. Just another PC term.

Bbo Nooner, Oregon (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:55 AM)

Ed, San Antonio:
Women are still treated as second class citizens, as long as right wingers insist on denying them their rights to decide what to do with “their” bodies and the pointy heads are wearing suits now (Jeff Sessions). The election of a Black President by the majority masses sent them into a tizzy. They don’t know whether to s**t or go blind.

Anita, Birmingham, Alabama (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:55 AM)

Roselle, I got the strange feeling after watching that joke of an "interview" with Liz Cheney this morning that Mika was going to head home and tell her husband, "You know, I actually really like Liz. She's really not so bad. Maybe we can invite them over for dinner some time..." ...all the while being UTTERLY UNAWARE that she had just been played like a Kentucky fiddle. It was embarrassing to watch...

CA Indy (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:56 AM)

For women to have cosmetic surgery, get a tattoo, or get eye laser surgery is a "privacy issue". But to abort a living child within their womb now involves another life. Look at the sonogram of a 4 month old in the womb--does that look like mere "tissue" to you? Or is it a living baby who also should have rights? The abortion movement with all its money and power has numbed the conscience of this nation. Babies deserve rights also. And remember to all the liberals who "claim" to defend women and minorities---abortion kills black babies, hispanic babies, and baby girls. On the day of judgment they just may rise up and ask you "where was all your passionate rhetoric and sense of justice when I needed some defending?"

Privacy? (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:58 AM)

I don't think she is all that great, but the Judicial Branch has been infamously unchecked since our founding. Plus the guy she's replacing isn't the most conservative judge to begin with. So nothing is actually changing in the balance-of-opinon on the bench. It would be more prudent for congress to start campaigning against the attitude that the courts can make laws. An all out congressional assault on judical activism would benefit our country better than fighting this nomination.

also...

Nashville, Fiesty, Anita, and other various liberal minded posters on the board:

My challenge for you today is to explain to me the Constitutionality of the Public Option Health Care Reform, The Stimulus Package, Cap and Trade, Obama's Proposed Expansion of the Fed, and/or The continued existence of the Fed.

You can do them all or just one. I'm tired of debating the supposed moral philosophy, and the economics behind any one of these issue when no one seems to want to challange the legality of them. So here I am telling you I think they are illegal. Prove me wrong.

Jonathan Flint, MI (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:04 PM)

Ed,

Explain to me how you get the constitution is a work in progress. Are you referring to the amendment process? Or are you an advocate of altering interpretations with changes in society?

Jonathan Flint, MI (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:06 PM)

Greg P NW Indiana

You are correct when you say that corporations get out of paying taxes by using loopholes and creative accounting. The thing I have never understood is why the corporations get blamed for that. If Congress makes it possible for corporations to pay zero taxes, and the corporations take advantage of that, why blame the corporations? Shouldn't we blame Congress, for creating this incomprehensible mess that we call the Federal Tax Code?

If Congress simplified the tax code, eliminating all deductions, and requiring taxation on all income, they would eliminate virtually all cheating. Everyone would have to pay their fair share.

So why don't they do that?

Mike in Woodridge, Illinois (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:07 PM)

A southern Senator (Sessions) questioning prejuice and its place in the supreme court is a joke! Hispanics and other minorities have been on the receiving line of years of southern Republican prejudice and racsism! I agree with her comments! Republicans lost a significant block of Hispanic support in 2008 and will the rest going forward! He's NOT conserned about prejudice. He simply doesn't want a Puertorican Latina Woman serving in the Supreme Court. I bet his next dumbass question or comment will be, "Show me your green card!"

Rafael DeJesus, Roswell, GA (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:15 PM)

She is a train wreck. Not a good choice Obama.

cindy, las vegas, nv (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:20 PM)

It's hard to watch this morning. I wish Sotomayor could really tell them off , but she can't. The Crackers are out in full force today.

ejfree (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:21 PM)

Sotomayer would be Obama wearing a skirt and we're already getting tired of Obama.

Feisty Brownhair (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:27 PM)

jesse St Paul MN
How hypocritical of you! You demonize someone as racist and then you proceed to stereotype and insult an entire area of people with no personal knowledge of that entire group. You are a moron and so is your entire family. You insulted me and several hundred thousand people with your jacka comment so any response you have to this posting is useless and moot.

chris, alabama (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:39 PM)

leon houston (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:42 PM)

To answer the first commenter, I too, have learned along the way, that if you hang around Republicans long enough, you begin to parody them, without realizing it. Mika's progression on "Morning Joe" is nothing short of astounding. Pundits like Mika, and that would include Left and Right, is why the TV Remote was invented.

Barbara - Fort Lauderdale, FL (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:53 PM)

How ironic it is to watch an old Alabama racist(Sessions) question an hispanic justices' impartiality based on race. Hello pot-meet kettle. The repubs want to keep the world safe for stupid white men like GW Bush who get ahead in life because of their daddys.

MIKDMD,Penacook NH, (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:08 PM)

The fact that Sonia Sotomayor is"A QUALIFIED" candidate seems to be missing. The G-No-P would probably whether have Palin with her Associate Degree sit on the Supreme Court!! It's good to see people FINALLY involved in Politics but some are taking it to a new Low!
The "wise Latina" statement has been taken completely out of context as have so many things coming from the G-No-P. Talk about racism!!! they own that!!

Vmac, Las Vegas, NV (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:18 PM)

Why do some of the people here who obviously dislike President Obama and anything or anyone to do with President Obama, resort to name-calling?

You can disagree, but please, some intelligent discourse would help.

Chandler W. (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:33 PM)

Justice Samuel Alito, during his confirmation hearings:

"Because when a case comes before me involving, let’s say, someone who is an immigrant — and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases — I can’t help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn’t that long ago when they were in that position…

When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."

The rupublicans liked THAT answer. Is there a difference between that and a "wise Latina"?

Mellowken, Vancouver, Wa (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:50 PM)

I find it amusing that some people are offended by Judge Sotomayor's comments.

The “supreme majority” (in their own minds) feel threatened by comments that point out the facts of life for many people. Notwithstanding, these were two words taken out of context that have the panties and manties of so many intelligent people in a wad.

Can we honestly believe that the life experiences of anyone from a minority group in this country are equally compared to a white man’s? No. Not unless we ignore the obvious and become senile.

Judge Sotomayor was merely making a statement towards something noted by Justices Ginsburg and O'Connor: that a wise old man and a wise old womam would come to the same conclusions on court cases...

Get over it and focus on TRUE issues.

Jewel (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 2:02 PM)

Why are the republicans trying to make so much of the wise latino statement? There had to be something said before she made the comment so why isn't it being reveal? Tell the truth and shame the devil, she probably could make better decision than those white men upon the hill. After all, the GOP let Bush and Cheney have the run of the mill. They stood by and let them do whatever they want to do; and Americans are paying for it. The GOP also knew what was going on and did not bother to do anything to help the American people. And now, they want Americans to feel sorry for them and give them a chance. For 8 years, Americans trusted them to do the right thing; but they didn't. And now, they want everyone else to fail. What kind of sense does that make. It sure proves they don't care about the American people. They have proven it over and over again, by not working with President Obama and the democrats. It is clear that they (and only GOP)wants to run this country. This is our country not the GOP, when will they understand that? Sotomayor is capable and able to be in the judge's seat, more than what you can say for any of them.

amazing grace, midwest city, ok (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 2:08 PM)

That Sessions, a clearly "unqualified" white male, who was REJECTED by the same commitee to be a Judge, is "AFRAID of being "discriminated against" by a non-white female Judge, with this nation's HISTORY of SLAVERY, JIM CROW. laws. LYNCHING and HATE FILLED bile directed at "immigrants", hispanics "illegal aliens" and ALL OTHERS who are NOT WHITE, it is laughable that these WHITE MEN, SENATORS from the SOUTH, are CONSTANTLY WHINING about the possiblity of being discriminated against?!?!?.

Qtip (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 2:45 PM)

Oh please.....if a white person made a remark like that it would live on eternally, and it would pre-empt them from holding any such office as that of an Associate Justice on The Supreme Court.
Let's be consistant in our disdain for racism, regardless of WHO the racist is.

SICK & TIRED OF POLITICAL HYPOCRISSY (Sent Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:07 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1995880