July 13, 2009

The NYT asks "7 legal experts to pose the questions they would like to hear [Sonia Sotomayor] answer."

There are: Stanford lawprof Kathleen M. Sullivan (who asks about the use of federalism to achieve progressive ends and the Supreme Court's response to the detainees), former secretary of homeland security Michael Chertoff (who asks about the influence of evidence, foreign law, and personal sympathy on judicial decisions), Yale lawprof Stephen L. Carter (who focuses on the limitations of the confirmation hearings, asks for the naming of a favorite Supreme Court Justice, and wonders whether Sotomayor will do something about the way these Supreme Court Justices today snipe at each other), former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (who asks whether "there is a difference between doing justice and applying the law" and whether Justices should take into account the way the United States is perceived around the world and what the standard is for overruling precedent), NYU lawprof Ronald Dworkin (who goads Sotomayor into admitting that judges can't decide cases by just "applying the law" and that it's okay for for government to have race-based policies that "reduce racial inequality and tension"), author James MacGregor Burns (who asks if Sotomayor believes in the notion of a living Constitution and whether the Constitution should be changed to abolish the power of judicial review and to require Justices to retire at age 70)... and me, your humble lawprof blogger (asking whether Sotomayor meant that "wise Latina" remark to be taken seriously, whether the Supreme Court will be better with a diverse array of Justices, and whether we ought to take note of the "extreme overrepresentation" of Catholics on the Court).

13 comments:

Skyler said...

The question I would pose is, "Did you pay Time Magazine to doctor your photo on their cover to make you appear to have the complexion of a 16 year old, or are they just showing their political stripes again?"

nina said...

Congrats on being asked to ask! Is it an empty wish list, or will they in some way trickle down to her in the course of the four-five day show, sorry, confirmation hearing?

former law student said...

Excellent questions, but they do not cover everything that the commentariat here want to know:

- Why do you hate white people?

- Do you really want to give Texas back to Mexico?

sierra said...

Is this the longest sentence Althouse has ever blogged?

traditionalguy said...

Heck with questions. I always was impressed with "trial by water" method. If she drowns, then she is innocent. But if she survives, than she is evil because she was rejected by the waters, so she must be burned at the stake. Our Senatorial Judges must apply this law to test her Latinoness. Discovering any new laws would be so wrong on so many levels.

rhhardin said...

Ask her to identify a passage in Cicero in the original Latin.

paul a'barge said...

I want to ask her:
"How much you charge to shine my shoes, Barina?"

jag said...

"Extreme overrepresentation of Catholics"

"Catholic" is an expansive concept that embraces even those who never attend Mass and rarely, if ever, agree with the Church on moral issues. What would it matter if you have a majority of justices who were baptized into but no longer practice Catholicism?

Ann Althouse said...

@rh It should be: "Non erit alia lex Romae, alia Athenis, alia nunc, alia posthac, sed et apud omnes gentes, et omni tempore una eademque lex obtinebit."

From Swift v. Tyson.

Ann Althouse said...

@sierra Ha ha. Probably!

rhhardin said...

Octavio Paz, ``The writer's morality does not lie in the subjects he deals with or the argments he sets forth, but in his behavior towards langauge.''

Ask Sotomayor what he meant.

John said...

Ann, did you see the slapdown they gave you on fivethirtyeight.com?

Evan said...

People shouldn’t pass these kinds of remarks for anyone because this is against the ethics of mankind!
Legal Experts