Jump to content

Sotomayor's radical legal group helped kill


Recommended Posts

"Sotomayor's Radical Legal Group Helped Kill the Estrada Nomination

By Matthew Vadum on 5.26.09 @ 5:20PM


President Obama's radical new nominee to replace Associate Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor, used to serve on the board of LatinoJustice PRLDEF (White House backgrounder), one of the racial grievance groups that helped to sink the judicial nomination of Honduran-born Miguel Estrada in 2003.


Along with groups such as the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), LatinoJustice fought a war of attrition against President George W. Bush's 2001 nomination of conservative Miguel Estrada, a Honduran-born immigrant, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Democrats in the Senate filibustered the nomination and a weary Estrada withdrew from consideration in 2003.


Today LatinoJustice PRLDEF, a tax-exempt 501©(3) nonprofit, hailed the nomination of Sotomayor on the basis of her ethno-cultural heritage. "As the second largest and fastest growing population in America, with a large pool of qualified individuals to choose from, it was wholly appropriate for the president to nominate a Hispanic," the group said in a written statement. (PDF)


According to the group's website, it gets some of its funding from George Soros's Open Society Institute."


excerpt http://spectator.org/blog/2009/05/26...al-legal-group


The Republicans better not be afraid to fight against Judge Sotomayor's nomination just because she is Hispanic, especially when her group fought against Estrada, who was also a Hispanic.


Contact the Republican U.S. Senators in your state and tell them to FIGHT against this antiConstitution woman's nomination. __________________

"..they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,.."

Our Founding Fathers knew our Creator gave us unalienable rights, not the govt.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

SO, there you have it.


Sotomayor is a radical, partisan, liberal wonk who will legistlate as much as her votes can,


from her position on the Supreme Court.


She should withdraw her name NOW.


And she is not qualified to become a Justice per her rampant partisanship and lack of regard


for interpreting the Constitution, as she wants to arrogantly vote her party line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure all the "Ricans" will be whooping it up on W.25th Street. NYC Rican parade will probably harass all the white women like they did a few years back, terrorizing white women all over the route. Yea, this is a real great pick, not racially motivated at all. :rolleyes: She is also strongly anti-firearm. (Cal/T) so watch out for that also. She will probably put a Rican flag in her office. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what Heck will bring up in this thread as a diversion...


"Yeah, but what about Halliburton?"


"You're (he might use "your") ignorant and childish Cal, Steve and T, Justice Thomas


was not Hispanic!)


or the more common: " ......................"




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, so far Heck has been silent.


You'd think Mr. Know-it-all Ad Hominem Highchair boy would


pick it apart.


But it's true, and Heck will hope it goes away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Sotomayor is a dishonest hypocrite with a Marxist agenda.


But Heck and Dan thinks she is very qualified to be a Justice.


But, seems I was right:


Hecks' reply to this post:


" ...."


and Dan must still be in the virtual bathroom gargling salt water...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. Not a peep from pro-Sotomayor lib hack groupies.


No speakie-speakie at all.


Liberals - "Sound of Silence"







Link to comment
Share on other sites

<H1 class="title entry-title">The Democratic war on a Hispanic nominee</H1>June 1, 2009 in SCOTUS


Much is made of the opposition by some conservatives and a few Republicans to the nomination of Judge Sotomayor. They are painted as denigrating a wonderful personal American story. They are disparaged as “anti-Hispanic.” The (liberal) media commentariat ominously warns that opposition to Sotomayor will hurt Republicans with Hispanic voters and drive them to the Democrats. They then piously urge the conservatives not to oppose her.


I stand by my previous position that I think Republicans should go easy on her. Focus not on defining her, but on using her to define Obama. She will get confirmed, and Republicans should not waste political capital targeting her as such.


That said, the hypocrisy of the Democrats and the, at best, ignorance but, more likely, willful connivance of the media never cease to amaze me. Does no one remember the 2001 nomination by George W. Bush of Miguel Estrada to the D.C. Circuit, generally seen as a whistle stop for him on the way to the Supreme Court (as the Democrats at the time agreed)? The Democrats derailed that nomination with a filibuster after a vicious campaign designed to vilify Estrada and attack his “racial authenticity.” The Democrat obstructionists refused even to give him an up-or-down vote.


Estrada is a brilliant man and a genuine American success story, at least as much as Judge Sotomayor. Among other things, he graduated from Columbia University (magna cum laude; Phi Beta Kappa) and Harvard Law (magna cum laude) after joining his divorced mother in this country from Honduras as a 17-year old not speaking much English. He was an editor on the Law Review and clerked at the federal court of appeals in New York and the Supreme Court for Justice Kennedy. He, too, earned the usual honors and accolades to his strong intellect.


He then worked for a Wall Street law firm before becoming an assistant U.S. attorney during the first Bush administration. He then joined the Clinton administration as an assistant to the Solicitor General. When he was nominated to the court of appeals by George W. Bush, he was given a unanimous well-qualified rating by the ABA.


What did the Democrats fear? They did not want Bush to put the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court. Especially one who sees himself not as a member of a tribalist identity group but as an American. He would not make the kind of comments for which Judge Sotomayor has come to be notorious.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

THIS is what Sotomayor should have been. An American first, fair, objective, brilliant and accomplished..


but no.


We get Sotomayor, a member? of La Raza, whose decisions have been controversial racially,


and Constitutionally, who has made racial comments, racially biased decision in the Ricci case,


and a radical who will probably/surely? be totally in Obama's hip pocket on unlimited abortion.


But, Estrada was shot down by politics, but ever so conveniently, the libs don't want Republicans


to play the same game.


Well, they shouldn't. But every truth about Sotomayor must come out in these hearings and a fair


appraisal made.


And I HOPE Estrada's name comes out in the hearings, or in the media. Probably won't happen though.


I remember the Estrada attacks very well.





Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...