3 responses so far ↓

• 1 Stella // Jun 8, 2009 at 2:31 pm

  The article as a self-contained work doesn’t do much of a job proving anything one way or the other. The lawyers’ comments on Sotomayor may or may not be true, but I didn’t see anything in them that betrayed particular notes of race or gender. I’d have to see something that offered a more comprehensive view of her career to be persuaded one way or the other. It’s possible she’s the victim of bigotry. But it’s also possible that, unrelated to being Latina and female, she may happen to lack appropriate judicial temperament. I couldn’t make the call either way from what’s in that article.

  One pitfall that pundits will have to avoid is the ability to be criticized for making arguments that sound like “because this person is [insert minority here] any accusations of incompetency must stem from [insert form of bigotry here] rather than legitimate concerns over competency.”

  If Judge Sotomayor is really an equal, she should be subject to brutal scrutiny just like everyone else. If she really is cut out for the job then a comprehensive picture of her career will provide automatic defense to racist or sexist accusations.

• 2 xJane // Jun 9, 2009 at 10:03 am

  She should absolutely be submitted to “brutal scrutiny” just as any candidate for a high office should be. However, there is no need to insult her intelligence or demeanor for actions that a male justice would be praised for.

• 3 JohnW // Jun 16, 2009 at 3:02 pm

  “Brutal” scrutiny? “Deep” scrutiny maybe. But “brutal?”

Leave a Comment