On Monday’s Fox and Friends, FNC judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano summarized the implications for the Supreme Court when President of liberal ideology is elected in a way rarely seen in the media. As he explained the goals that Republicans will have during this week’s confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Napolitano contended that electing a liberal President can lead to the appointment of judges with some of the "strange" and "odd" views and rulings exemplified by Sotomayor. Napolitano:
The Republicans want to accomplish making the country aware of the fact that when you elect a liberal Democrat as President, you get a judicial nominee with these strange ideas. Like, if you take a test, and you pass the test and you're supposed to get promoted, well, you won't get promoted because not enough people from another race passed the test. A lot of Americans will reject that attitude which she embraced. ... If they can show her as embracing odd attitudes like that, they can show up the President for being the liberal that we know he is and that the American people might not be willing to accept.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
Napolitano also brought up the implications for some of her statements off the bench, and suggested that she may be more willing to make more extreme rulings against Supreme Court precedent as a member of the Supreme Court than she would have made on a lower court, because on a lower court she must follow the established legal interpretations of the Supreme Court. Napolitano:
I think the fear is that the wise Latina stuff, the speeches in which she's pushed the envelope, those attitudes will start to seep into her opinions once she gets on the Supreme Court from which there effectively is no appeal. On the circuit court of appeals, I mean, she really has to follow what the Supreme Court says the law is, but if she's on the Supreme Court, there's effectively no appeal from that. And the attitude that I'm different, I'm here because I'm a member of a group can sort of seep its way into the jurisprudence.
Below is a complete transcript of the segment with Napolitano from Monday’s Fox and Friends on FNC:
PETER JOHNSON, JR.: Confirmation hearings, they’re going to begin this morning for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, and she’s expected to face some tough questions.
STEVE DOOCY: All right, Fox News senior judicial analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano, is here with a preview of the hearings that kick off today with a statement at 10:00 Eastern. You’ll see it right here on the Fox News Channel. Okay, Judge, some of the things, Time magazine, their online thing, they already have how the Republicans plan their attack.
NAPOLITANO: Right.
DOOCY: You know, I don't know why they framed it that way, oh, it's Time magazine. Everybody wants to know whether or not this is a fair person. And one of the first things that's going to come up is that remark that she made a number of times regarding the wise Latina. She would hope that a wise Latina would make a better decision than a white male.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO, FNC JUDICIAL ANALYST: I'm sure she wishes she had said it differently. I’m sure she wishes she had said a wise Latina would bring different experiences to the court than a white male would.
DOOCY: Sure.
NAPOLITANO: And, in fact, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in yesterday’s New York Times Sunday magazine, basically said I'm different, I'm a woman, I'm Jewish. I was worn in Brooklyn. I brought some different experiences and ideas to the court – not better ones, but different ones. I'm sure she has an answer to that, but I think the goal-
DOOCY: But she said it several times. It wasn’t like she just said it one time.
NAPOLITANO: She said it five times. She said it five times. Now, if you read her opinions – and I read many of her opinions for the documentary we ran last night – they are decidedly liberal. But I think you’ll agree, Peter, within the mainstream of American legal thinking. It is her statements to law students and lawyers and judges and advocacy groups off the bench where she pushes the envelope.
JOHNSON: I do agree with you, and I think her opinions are in the mainstream. So here’s the question. If her opinions are in the mainstream, why are some people getting upset about her? She’s been a prosecutor. She’s been a commercial litigator. She’s been a district court judge. She’s been an appellate court judge at the federal level. Is somehow she going to change her stripes when she gets to the Supreme Court? Is that the fear?
NAPOLITANO: I think the fear is that the wise Latina stuff, the speeches in which she’s pushed the envelope, those attitudes will start to seep into her opinions once she gets on the Supreme Court from which there effectively is no appeal. On the circuit court of appeals, I mean, she really has to follow what the Supreme Court says the law is, but if she’s on the Supreme Court, there’s effectively no appeal from that. And the attitude that I'm different, I'm here because I'm a member of a group can sort of seep its way into the jurisprudence.
JOHNSON: But in American history, haven't certain members gone to the Supreme Court because they were part of a group.
NAPOLITANO: Yes, yes, they have. Yes, they have. And certain people have gone to the Supreme Court with the idea that I’m here to represent a certain view. And certain people have gone to the Supreme Court and terribly disappointed the President who nominated them and the people who supported them.
JOHNSON: If you could cast a vote today, would you have voted her?
NAPOLITANO: I wouldn't have nominated her because I’m not likely to agree-
JOHNSON: No, as a Senator, as a Senator, would you vote for her to confirm her?
NAPOLITANO: If you believe that you can reject somebody because of ideology, I would vote against her because I disagree with her on many, many things. If you believe that you should vote just on the basis of competence and give the President his due, then she should be confirmed..
DOOCY: But it's a math problem. The Democrats have got the 60 votes. It's already a done deal. So the big question is, how much of a ruckus do the Republicans want to raise?
NAPOLITANO: Here’s what the Republicans want to accomplish. The Republicans want to accomplish making the country aware of the fact that when you elect a liberal Democrat as President, you get a judicial nominee with these strange ideas. Like, if you take a test, and you pass the test and you’re supposed to get promoted, well, you won't get promoted because not enough people from another race passed the test. A lot of Americans will reject that attitude which she embraced.
JOHNSON: But that’s not mainstream, right?
NAPOLITANO: That is not mainstream. If they can show her as embracing odd attitudes like that, they can show up the President for being the liberal that we know he is and that the American people might not be willing to accept.
—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
If they can show her as
July 13, 2009 - 17:24 ET by bigtimerIf they can show her as embracing odd attitudes like that, they can
show up the President for being the liberal that we know he is and that
the American people might not be willing to accept.
The American people may not be willing to accept it, but what's that matter to congress...they go against our will all the time.
It's up to people as a whole to pay attention to what is going on when they can, pay attention to their congress-critters and do their best to vote them out...
Of course then again we have ACORN and such...no voter I.D. on and on it goes...
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Even more damming
July 13, 2009 - 17:52 ET by legacyrepublicanAn even more damming observation about how odd Ms. Sotomoayor is can be found in looking at the Hartford City Council demographics.
There are three blacks, three hispanics, and four whites. The mayor is Hispanic.
Let's ignore party affliation and stick with their ethnic diversity as the reasonings.
In the midst of such eithnic diversity, she agreed with them when they wanted to throw results that allowed whites to succeed while no black passed because they felt that the results were not in keeping with their hiring goals and they ought to be allowed to toss out their hiring tests.
Does Sotomoayor feel that since the ethnic diversity of the country is predomity white, that sports teams ought to prevent exceptional black athletes from being hired for NBA teams in order to reflect the diversity of the country?
Since both a fire fighter and a basketball player both have to show physical abilities and intelligence to do their job, that ought to be a reasonable conclusion.
That alone is at odds with how most of us would react.
When I watch a basketball game, I value talent, not color. Likewise, when I watch a fire truck go by me, I value their courage and skills, not their color ( although I like the color of their truck to be red, not that ugly snotty green ).
The chance to succeed despite one's color or ethnic heritage is not at odds with American values.
The denial of the chance to succeed when the chance to succeed was fair is at odds with American values.
Her choice to support the majority of the city council at the expense of the minority of the fire department, that is those willing to work hard to improve their skills and acheive, allows the system to fail.
Even more damming
July 13, 2009 - 17:59 ET by legacyrepublicanAn even more damming observation about how odd Ms. Sotomoayor is can be found in looking at the Hartford City Council demographics.
There are three blacks, three hispanics, and four whites. The mayor is Hispanic.
Let's ignore party affliation and stick with their ethnic diversity as the reasonings.
In the midst of such eithnic diversity, she agreed with them when they wanted to throw results that allowed whites to succeed while no black passed because they felt that the results were not in keeping with their hiring goals and they ought to be allowed to toss out their hiring tests.
Does Sotomoayor feel that since the ethnic diversity of the country is predomity white, that sports teams ought to prevent exceptional black athletes from being hired for NBA teams in order to reflect the diversity of the country?
Since both a fire fighter and a basketball player both have to show physical abilities and intelligence to do their job, that ought to be a reasonable conclusion.
That alone is at odds with how most of us would react.
When I watch a basketball game, I value talent, not color. Likewise, when I watch a fire truck go by me, I value their courage and skills, not their color ( although I like the color of their truck to be red, not that ugly snotty green ).
The chance to succeed despite one's color or ethnic heritage is not at odds with American values.
The denial of the chance to succeed when the chance to succeed was fair is at odds with American values.
Her choice to support the majority of the city council at the expense of the minority of the fire department, that is those willing to work hard to improve their skills and acheive, allows the system to fail.
If they made a law saying
July 13, 2009 - 18:52 ET by RR GOPIf they made a law saying you have to wear a green Jester's hat with blue stripes and a little bell on the end when changing lanes on Interstate 10, Napolitano and most of these other scum-sucking lawyers they have on Fox News every other day would simply shrug and say, "Well, that's the law...gotta do what the law says. Sorry."
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
→ RR GOP
July 13, 2009 - 18:57 ET by Cool ArrowI can only hope you have your Napolitanos mixed up.
Judge Andrew Napolitano seems to have his conservative head screwed on straight.
Agreed, But Far From The Point
July 13, 2009 - 19:05 ET by JDWSotomayor is going to be appointed, screw the minute by minute suck-up and/or sullen coverage.
Who can tell me what Obama was doing today?
JDW
DAILY WAVE
When people fear their government there is tyranny.
When government fears the people there is liberty.
JDW... Gee...I wasn't
July 13, 2009 - 19:10 ET by bigtimerJDW...
Gee...I wasn't here a lot of today, didn't O have his uusal breaking news announcement of some kind to make?
...adn yeah, it's a given Soto is going to appt.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart