BrianGarst.com

What’s going on here?

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) asked Sonia Sotomayor if she agrees with something Barack Obama said as a senator when deciding to vote against John Roberts as chief justice of the Supreme Court.

At the time, Obama said: “In those cases, adherence to precedent and rules of construction and interpretation will only get you through the 25th mile of the marathon. That last mile can only be determined on the basis of one’s deepest values, one’s core concerns, one’s broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one’s empathy.”

… “He has to explain what he meant by judging,” Sotomayor said. “Judges can’t explain what’s in their heart — the job of a judge is to apply the law. It’s not the heart that compels conclusions in cases, it’s the law.”

According to Obama, Sotomayor was everything he was looking for in a judge, which means she met his empathy standard.  Now, speaking at her confirmation hearing (under oath?), she has rejected this standard.  Was Obama wrong in his evaluation of her?

No, he was not.  What we are seeing now is a hustle.  Sotomayor knows that Obama’s position, and her own chosen philosophy, is at odds with the proper role of the judiciary.  She knows it and yet continues to put it into action anyway because she doesn’t care about the proper role of the judiciary; she cares about getting to the desired liberal outcomes.  Lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee is just one more step down that road, no more significant to her than her frequent willingness to twist and bend the law to serve a radical ideology.

Barack Obama Sonia Sotomayor