by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
Blacks and progressives should prefer a "wise Latina" to the usual Supreme Court fare, any day. "The white male perspective has ruled unchallenged for centuries and has done great damage to human beings around the world." However, just because Sonia Sotomayor is under attack from raging racists, doesn't mean she should get a free pass from the Left. "Sotomayor should not be allowed to escape scrutiny because of race pride and meaningless swooning from white liberals."
Freedom Rider: The Sotomayor Hype
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
âShe is called a âcentrist,â a label which tells us little in an age when the political pendulum doesnât ever swing back to the left.â
The nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court should be an opportunity to assess her record, and to critically assess the Obama administration and develop strategic responses to his actions. Instead, most of the discussion post nomination has focused on one speech Sotomayor gave in 2001 and the person of color boot strap story so beloved by the corporate media and liberal whites.
Appeals Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has been considered a possible Supreme Court justice for some time. She was always at the top of the list of possible replacements for retiring Justice David Souter. The White House floated the Sotomayor trial balloon and when it wasnât shot down, decided to move forward.
Sotomayor has impressive credentials, that is to say she attended the universities that ambitious people have to attend if they expect to be appointed to the federal judiciary or anything else of note. If confirmed by the Senate she will be only the third woman and the first Latina Supreme Court justice. The media love the story of a Puerto Rican whose widowed mother lived in a housing project while she worked two jobs to support her children.
The pulling up by the bootstraps story can be a very dangerous one. Inherent in the âshe came from the projectsâ exultation is a racist, class conscious condemnation of people who happen to live in public housing. Many public housing residents are productive, honest people. Some end up leaving, some donât and those who donât shouldnât be vilified if they donât attend ivy league schools and sit on the federal bench.
âThe media love the story of a Puerto Rican whose widowed mother lived in a housing project while she worked two jobs to support her children.â
Praise for the humble beginnings story is also dangerous because it provides an easy way out for white America. Like voting for Barack Obama, singing the praises of Sonia Sotomayor allows white people to let themselves off the hook when they ought to examine their nationâs continuing racism and their role in it.
Sotomayorâs nomination is historic, just as Obamaâs elevation to the presidency is historic. However historic her rise, it should not be allowed to absolve her from acting on behalf of citizens and not on behalf of corporations and an oppressive government. Obamaâs hyped up âhistoricâ accomplishment has allowed him to be a wolf in sheepâs clothing, spreading war and codifying the worse aspects of Bush era rules on indefinite detention. Sotomayor should not be allowed to escape scrutiny because of race pride and meaningless swooning from white liberals.
Lacking in the media is any substantive reports of her decisions on the federal bench. She was originally appointed by president George H.W. Bush 1991 and later to the court of appeals by Bill Clinton in 1997. She is called a âcentrist,â a label which tells us little in an age when the political pendulum doesnât ever swing back to the left. In the fifty most recent discrimination cases (*link scouts blog) on which she ruled, she and her colleagues accepted a finding of discrimination only three times.
âThe white male perspective has ruled unchallenged for centuries and has done great damage to human beings around the world.â
Yet one statement she made is getting particular attention, and for all the wrong reasons, giving rightwing talking heads much to wring their hands over. In a 2001 speech she made the following statement:
âI would hope 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. Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case.â
While her rulings in discrimination cases receive scant attention, this one comment is repeated over and over again. The statement rings true. The thoughts of white men have been deemed normative, the only thoughts worthy of consideration. White male jurists kept slavery in place, and segregation and sex discrimination. What is wrong with a Latina perspective determining the law? The white male perspective has ruled unchallenged for centuries and has done great damage to human beings around the world. The âwise Latinaâ argument should work just fine, but when Republicans attacked the president didnât defend her very strongly. Instead, in typical Obama fashion he insisted that she would ârestateâ the remark. The fact Obama chose her means that she is probably not the second coming of Thurgood Marshall. He told us early on that he would not pick anyone who could be called a liberal jurist:
"I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role. I will seek somebody who shares my respect for constitutional values on which this nation was founded, and who brings a thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time.
As I make this decision, I intend to consult with members of both parties across the political spectrum."(Emphasis mine.)
Republicans will make racist hay and compare Sotomayor to a KKK member, but that is no reason to dismiss accountability from her or from Obama. The rush to defend her from attacks by Newt Gingrich or Rush Limbaugh should not be a reason to let her escape hard questioning. After all, the power to make lifetime judicial appointments is supposed to be a reason to put Democrats in the Oval Office. If Obama has to ask Republican permission before he makes a nomination, then we have one more argument against the importance of Democrats being in office.
Sotomayor is an unknown quantity whose long history of court rulings demand full examination. If that doesnât happen, we will have another Obama, and one of those is quite enough.
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.Com.
Juan Guaido's "interim presidency" of Venezuela has come to an end, as opposition parties chose to end the U.S. backed arrangement. They hope to unify behind one candidate in next year'sâŚ
John Parker is coordinator of the Harriet Tubman Center for Social Justice in Los Angeles and a leading member of the Socialist Unity Party. He is also a member of the Black Alliance for Peace whoâŚ
The latest in Mumia Abu Jamal's defense, the UN Permanent Forum on People of African Descent and its connection to the Durban conference, and a new book âSanctions: A Wrecking Ball in a GlobalâŚ
Johanna Fernandez is an Associate Professor of history at Baruch College, and a longtime advocate for political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal. She joins us from New York City to discuss the loss of hisâŚ
Efia Nwangaza discusses her participation in the first session of the UN Permanent Forum on People of African Descent, a mechanism that emerged from the 2001 Durban world conference against racism.
