Home | Live Now! |  Try it Now
Roger Pilon on Sonia Sotomayor
 
11:34
Fred Barbash-Moderator -  Good afternoon and thanks for joining us. Our guest today is Roger Pilon, a distinguished Arena contributor who is   Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Cato Institute where he holds the B. Kenneth Simon Chair in Constitutional Studies. He is the founder and director of Cato's Center for Constitutional Studies, the publisher of the Cato Supreme Court Review, and an adjunct professor of government at Georgetown University through The Fund for American Studies.

Yesterday, Roger posted the following comment on the Sotomayor nomination:

"In nominating Second Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor to fill the seat of retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter, President Obama chose the most radical of all the frequently mentioned candidates before him. Given the way her panel recently summarily dismissed the Ricci case – involving the complaint by New Haven, Connecticut, firefighters that the city had thrown out the results of an officers exam because the results did not come out “right” – and the expectation, based on oral argument, that the Supreme Court will reverse the Second Circuit decision, there will likely be an extremely contentious confirmation battle ahead. If confirmation hearings are scheduled for summer, they will follow shortly upon the Court’s decision in that explosive case. Are we to imagine that President Obama chose as he did because he wants that battle?"

Roger Pilon will join us at noon. You may submit questions in advance. Please use a name, rather than a handle or "guest."

12:00
Roger Pilon -  As a political matter, President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sotomayor appears to be perfect. First, it reflects his own affinity for the “identity politics” that has dominated the legal academy for decades, a politics she shares. Second, that is the politics of his base, which has been unhappy with a number of his recent decisions, especially regarding the War on Terror. And finally, Judge Sotomayor helps cement the Democratic Party’s hold on the Hispanic vote. As a legal matter, however, identity politics and the “judicial empathy” both the president and Judge Sotomayor laud raise serious questions. Law is supposed to create a neutral framework within which individuals and organizations find the freedom to live and prosper. It is not supposed to be a tool through which groups, including political majorities, are able manipulate government power against others for their own ends. Yet that’s what we’ve come to in so many ways, and there are signs that Judge Sotomayer would only further those developments. She was restrained as a lower court judge. On the Supreme Court she will not be similarly constrained, which is why her off-court statements loom so large to so many of us. They reflect her judicial and constitutional philosophy, which if confirmed she would be freer to indulge.
12:01
Fred Barbash-Moderator -  Roger. Welcome. You answered my first question before I asked it.. Now let's turn it over to our readers.
12:01
[Comment From Kevin MN]
Roger, you and many conservatives argue for a strict constructionist take on the Constituition. In your opinion, do you think many of the ground breaking civil rights cases of the second half of the 20th century should be overturned? Do you think the Constitution, as it was orginally written, is fair?
    Page 1  Next >
 
Powered by: CoveritLive  Reader Information