As already noted in the previous blog entries here and here, there are many things which concern conservatives and libertarians regarding Sonia Sotomayor’s previous positions, statements and rulings.

We have heard nothing from the left regarding Sotomayor’s judicial activism and disturbing racist comments. On the contrary, we have only heard about her “compelling life story”, as if that makes any difference in whether she will be a fair and impartial judge. From the perspective of the left, this nomination is about everything but Sotomayer’s ability to be fair and impartial. Instead, focusing on the human interest story of an extremely liberal and controversial judge who has just had one of her race based rulings overturned by SCOTUS.

Sotomayor is a product of affirmative action. Her acceptance into Ivy league schools was not simply based on merit, but based on quotas, so how could she not judge through a racial lens, considering that she has benefited greatly from racial quotas.

Unfortunately, there are not enough votes to block this nomination, or the political will to block it either. As Lindsey Graham noted, with 60 democrats in the senate, her confirmation is a done deal. Even after voicing all of his concerns, Graham is still not committed to opposing Sotomayor’s nomination. This is typical for neocons like Lindsey Graham. Many of whom are simply grandstander’s looking for camera time.

Nonetheless, real conservatives such as Jeff Sessions (R – Alabama) have a duty to expose Sotomayor for the true liberal judical activist I believe her to be. They can, at the least, hold her feet to the fire regarding her past statements and actions, giving the American public the opportunity to see how important it is to choose a president who will make wise nominations to SCOTUS, rather that what we are now seeing with this idealogical and highly politically motivated nomination.

As far as I can see, that is about all the conservatives can gain at this point.

The Supreme Court handed a victory Monday to a group of white firefighters charging racial discrimination, while also giving some fodder to critics of President Barack Obama’s pending nominee for the high court, Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for a court split 5-4 along ideological lines, reversed an appeals court ruling Sotomayor joined last year that rejected a claim that the City of New Haven, Conn., discriminated against white firefighters  by throwing out a promotional exam after all the African-American firefighters who took it scored too poorly to be promoted.

“Whatever the City’s ultimate aim — however well intentioned or benevolent it might have seemed — the City made its employment decision because of race. The City rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white,” Kennedy wrote on behalf of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

Kennedy said that allowing the city’s conduct would establish “a de facto quota system” where test results could be discarded whenever a particular racial group didn’t achieve the average score. link

This should serve as a signal to congress to carefully scrutinize Sotomayor’s previous rulings during her upcoming SCOTUS nomination hearings. Considering her past anti-2nd amendment statements, as well as her racially charged comments and misguided rulings, she is clearly not the kind of person we need sitting on the highest court in the land. We need SCOTUS judges who will rule based on the original intent our founding fathers articulated so carefully in the constitution.

The last thing we need is someone who sees the constitution as malleable and who is willing to rewrite our most sacred documents based on racial agendas and misguided ideology.