SCOTUS Hearings Are All The Same

More
Well, it's important to remember that, as a judge, I don't make law. And so the task for me as a judge is not to accept or not accept new theories; it's to decide whether the law, as it exists, has principles that apply to new situations.

With respect to Judge Sotomayor and her defenders, explain how this paragraph, taken from this morning's proceedings,  is not tautological and circular. Of course judges accept new theories. All of them do. Pretending they don't is a feature of American life limited to the twenty hours a year the Senate Judiciary Committee investigates the legal mind of the next Supreme Court justices. (Thanks to Justice R.B. Ginsburg for originating this type of performance.)  The advise and consent function of the Senate has turned into a "provide comfort" function that sets up political precedents ("Well, when Obama nominated Judge Sotomayor, she promised she wouldn't make new law, and look what happened!"). Of course there are differences between justices; take Sandra Day O'Connor's minimalism and John Paul Stevens' activism.  In theory, these hearings are supposed to help us figure these out. Instead, they're designed to squish everyone into some supposed middle ground where judicial theories and environmental predispositions never matter (except when they do.)  That leads to absurdity all around: Senator John Kyl being unaware that white guys bring their perspective to situations, or Patrick Leahy patiently coaching Sotomayor through her days a facts only, mam, prosecutor.  Sotomayor won't tell anyone what she thinks about executive power, or anti-trust law, or late-term abortions. Instead, we're supposed to judge her temperament and mien, as if that's the only reason why she was chosen -- as if that's the only predictive information available to those who want to figure out what kind of justice she will be.

Jump to comments
Presented by

Marc Ambinder is an Atlantic contributing editor. He is also a senior contributor at Defense One, a contributing editor at GQ, and a regular contributor at The Week.

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

When Will Robots Take Over the World?

"In a sense, we're already becoming cyborgs."


Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

Is Wine Healthy?

James Hamblin prepares to impress his date with knowledge about the health benefits of wine.

Video

The World's Largest Balloon Festival

Nine days, more than 700 balloons, and a whole lot of hot air

Video

The Origins of Bungee Jumping

"We had this old potato sack and I filled it up with rocks and dropped it over the side. It just hit the water, split, dropping all the stones. And that was our test."

Video

Is Trading Stocks for Suckers?

If you think you’re smarter than the stock market, you’re probably either cheating or wrong

Video

I Spent Half My Life Making a Video Game

How a childhood hobby became a labor of love

Writers

Up
Down

More in Politics

Just In