First Hispanic Supreme Court Justice Takes Prominent Role

Joan Biskupic, Yahoo! News, April 25, 2012

The Supreme Court was deep into arguments over Arizona’s new immigration law on Wednesday when the high court’s first Hispanic justice focused on how difficult it could be for police officers to determine whether someone they stop is in the United States legally.

“What information does your (federal) system have?” Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli as she methodically extracted a core element of the Obama administration’s case against the state of Arizona.

{snip}

Puerto Ricans have for nearly a century been U.S. citizens, so Sotomayor’s family did not face the dilemmas of many other Hispanics who moved to the United States. Yet Sotomayor, who grew up in a housing project and went to Princeton and Yale on scholarships, has referred to the sting of discrimination and feeling “different” among people from elite backgrounds.

Verrilli told her that while many federal databases exist, including one listing U.S. passport holders, there is no citizenship database. “So you have lots of circumstances in which people who are citizens are going to come up (with) no match,” he added.

On Wednesday, as Sotomayor, who joined the court in 2009, heard her first major immigration case, she vigorously questioned both sides. She showed a particular concern for the plight of people who might be detained by police based on their race or ethnicity.

{snip}

For his part, Clement brushed off concerns about problems in federal databases that might prevent local officials from quickly knowing the immigration status of someone stopped.

“If there is some sloppiness in the way the federal government keeps its records so that there’s lots of people that really should be registered but aren’t, I can’t imagine that sloppiness has a preemptive effect” that would prevent a state from adopting its own laws to stop illegal immigration.

Sotomayor, President Barack Obama’s first appointee to the Supreme Court, was not without criticism for parts of his administration’s position and at one point observed that Verrilli’s arguments were “not selling very well.”

To be sure, the overall tone of Wednesday’s hearing, dominated by conservative justices who hold a majority on the court, suggested the court would ultimately rule that states have a role in regulating illegal immigrants and that a significant part of the Arizona law should be upheld.

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • ageofknowledge

    In my opinion, she went “all in” for her race rather than this country.

  • I was telling people from the moment we started to find out the details about this woman that she was an anti-White racist and a radical leftist who had no business being anywere close to the high court.
    Looks like we are going to see that I was right….

  • Flaxen-headed Strumpet

    The really peculiar thing about Justice Sodacracker is that Jesse Helms supported her confimation to The Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

    http://projects.newsobserver.com/taxonomy/term/559,8785

    • Oil Can Harry

      Helms also supported p.c. liberal Colin Powell, the affirmative action general who would later endorse Obama.

  • Rocky Bass

    A broken clock is right twice a day. Even if she rules fairly and constitutionally on this ONE issue, she has hundreds if not thousands of others to totally TRASH.

  • By the way she pronounced her her name with HEAVY accents on the “So-toe-may-orrr” and rolled the r’s  sent a chill down my back.

    She’ll side with her Sacred Cow.

  • This may be shallow, but… I think if she were better looking, her ethnic-racial solidarity would be rather tenuous. In case of a hag – things are different.

  • Kurt Plummer

    >
    Puerto Ricans have for nearly a century been U.S. citizens, so Sotomayor’s family did not face the dilemmas of many other Hispanics who moved to the United States. Yet Sotomayor, who grew up in a housing project and went to Princeton and Yale on scholarships, has referred to the sting of discrimination and feeling “different” among people from elite backgrounds.
    >

    So because she felt out of place in a white society, she feels a need to change it by making sure that as many hispanics as possible come flooding in.

    To which I would respond:  “Lady, how many times have you been to your homeland?  The abilities of the exceptional DO NOT prove the rights of the majority.”

    And I would use the presence of so many white vs. so few hispanics as the guiding proof.  Up to 70% of hispanics in California _do not_ go on to higher education.  In early births and failure to graduate high school, they are beginning to rival blacks.

    >
    Sotomayor, President Barack Obama’s first appointee to the Supreme Court, was not without criticism for parts of his administration’s position and at one point observed that Verrilli’s arguments were “not selling very well.”
    >

    Which is nothing more or less than a warning shot across the bows of the Obama administration to give her something to work with so that she doesn’t look like a total ethno bigot and self-espousing racist -fool- for defending a policy which she is clearly compromised by her own identity politics in advocating for.

    Given that _The Will Of The People_ has spoken, there is nothing here for the SCOTUS to do but it’s job.  And that job should be to decide whether or not the Federal Government and particularly the Congress thereof has, with due diligence pursued it’s own legislation relative to the protection of our borders and our people.

    They have not.  And so Obama’s only say in this should be that, as executive in charge of the defense of our nation and enforcement of it’s Congressionally mandated laws, he too has -failed- in his duties.

    Anything else is social engineering which the SCOTUS has no business engaging in.

  • xxxtonygunsxxx

    i would like zimmer to work at my gated community! {even though hes a black and  hispanic which normally i would not want to hire} i will hire him to fill my affirmative action quota! thank you zimmer for your application i like your resume i really appreciate it