The push for Sonia Sotomayor to join the Supreme Court continues as the views of Sotomayor continue to be introduced to the public. However, I wonder if anyone will start to question if she is truly the right person for the job (say, like I did when the news first came out).

My original main concern was that she wasn’t the best choice for the job as there are countless other individuals with stronger legal backgrounds available to fill the role. It wasn’t a position of Democrat or Republican; it was a question of her qualifications.

Now even Sotomayor, herself, is saying that she wasn’t qualified to get into her school and that affirmative action was the reason she has had the opportunities:

“If we had gone through the traditional numbers route of those institutions, it would have been highly questionable if I would have been accepted,” she said on a panel of three female judges from New York who were discussing women in the judiciary. The video is dated “early 1990s” in Senate records.

But of course, it wasn’t that she didn’t have the ability – it was the fault of the test.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor once described herself as “a product of affirmative action” who was admitted to two Ivy League schools despite scoring lower on standardized tests than many classmates, which she attributed to “cultural biases” that are “built into testing.”

This, right here, angers me in a way that is very difficult for me to describe. Not because she was given an “opportunity” – one she apparently made the most of – but because this statement implies people cannot overcome adversity.

There are certain standards one must meet in order to function in a specific role. If I go to Germany, and I speak fluent German, but do not have the cultural background and knowledge of the local people – which is needed in order to get into my University of choice – how would I get it?

I wouldn’t.

If I built my knowledge base, understood the details of the community and country, even the obscure details, then I would have a better chance. I wouldn’t, and shouldn’t, even be considered if I do not have the minimum requirements. That said, I can place myself in a position where I can have the needed knowledge. So, to say there is cultural biases built into testing – while possible true – is no excuse. You find a way to succeed, not depend on someone to get you through simply because of your race/sex/background.

More and more it seems that society simply expects things to be given to them, we have to work for them. We have to earn them. If there is something in our way, find a new path and don’t make excuses.

Yesterday I had feared/lamented/complained that Sonia Sotomayor was an under qualified candidate for the supreme court.  While I did not go into great deal, my main issues were her apparent belief that judging is based in empathy, not reason and law – ALSO – the fact that she made borderline racist statements.

I worried that no one, Republican or Democrat, would stand up and say this individual is more of a show position for Mr. Obama than the best person for the job. While very few politicians have pointed out the fact that she has a 60% reversal rating, one former politician has pointed out the hypocrisy that race plays in this process:

Imagine a judicial nominee said “my experience as a white man makes me better than a latina woman” Wouldn’t they have to withdraw? New racism is no better than old racism.

A white man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw.

He is right.  Had a white man said such a thing, everyone would be all over him. Not only would he be forced to withdraw, he would be branded as a racist for the rest of his life.

To be clear, here is what Sotomayor had said:

First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

She is right, there is no universal definition of wise.  That said, at best, the second part of the statement is poorly worded and at worst, she is sexist and racist.  Two people of different backgrounds will not – most likely – arrive at the same conclusion.  Problem is this: when you are a judge, you need to adhere to the LAW and not make decisions based on your life experiences with no regard to the law. If the LAW was broken you cannot simply dismiss the actions of an individual because of their race.

Let’s say the comment is not racist.  It is then a highly insensitive position for a public figure, one who “makes policy” (her words, not mine) and one who is supposed to be unbiased, to voice.

The comment above, along with others, is a very disturbing patter that can be seen with Sotomayor. Not only is she under qualified, she is simply the wrong person for the job.  This is not about political party, this is about having a qualified individual in the role. A brave politician on either side of the aisle needs to take a stand.

I was in the process of writing a very long, very detailed criticism of President Obama’s choice of Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court.  I’ve given up.

Sure, I went into detail about her views that judging should be based on empathy, not on reason. I had plenty of quotes on how she has stated it impossible for the poor to overcome in the United States, even though that is exactly what she did.  I was going to go into detail on how she believes sex and race play a part in the judicial process, sometimes overshadowing the law.  I was also going to cover how she has a history of having her decision overturned and a lack of case review on her part.  But, as I said, I’ve give up.

Why?

It is a fruitless effort.  

It was clear Mr. Obama wanted specific type of person for the open Supreme Court position.  All of the final choices were women, most with an “activist” agenda.  He wasn’t interested in finding the right person for the job, he was looking for a label. It’s also clear that Republican’s cannot truly oppose her choice as they will be labeled racist.

That wouldn’t be the case – they would be opposing simply because she is not qualified and apparently biased in her role…but that is now how the press would spin it.

Think about this. What happens if you apply for a job that you are not qualified for?  

Most likely, you are not going to get an interview let alone get the job. The second an institution starts picking people because of their age, sex and/or ethnic background creditability is instantly lost. If you are not picking the most qualified person available, why are you picking anyone at all?

This isn’t a political issue – she has had both Democratic and Republican support in her career – this is about doing the right thing.  Based off of everything I’ve read in the last 12 hours, she is not the right choice.  There are a number of highly qualified individuals, both men and women, would should be filling this role. Sonia Sotomayor is not one of those choice.