26 May 2009 (am)

Workout notes yoga, then 4 mile walk with Ms. Vickie followed by a social breakfast. I was slightly sore.

Walking You meet some interesting characters when you walk long distances. I’ve walked with Larry at the 2006 Houston 24 hour, the 2007 Fans 24 hour and at the 2007 Ultracentric. Well, Larry is an accomplished writer (fiction) and here is a piece on him in USA Today.

Politics: Mostly I am happy with President Obama’s pick, but there is one thing I don’t like about her.

Here is more criticism from the left and a link to more detailed discussion (which is very fair to justices Alito and Roberts) is here.

From the last link:

Opponents’ first claim – likely stated obliquely and only on background – will be that Judge Sotomayor is not smart enough for the job. This is a critical ground for the White House to capture. The public expects Supreme Court Justices to be brilliant. Harriet Miers was painted (frequently, by conservatives) as not up to the job. The same claim (absurd to anyone who has talked with him) is still made by the left about Clarence Thomas. By contrast, John Roberts was described as brilliant and Sam Alito as exceptionally smart.

The objective evidence is that Sotomayor is in fact extremely intelligent. Graduating at the top of the class at Princeton is a signal accomplishment. Her opinions are thorough, well-reasoned, and clearly written. Nothing suggests she isn’t the match of the other Justices.

Update Ten Key Points, including one that the Republicans will attack.

10. SOTOMAYOR ON THE CONSTITUTION AND “JUDICIAL ACTIVISM”: The ubiquitous conservative attack on Sotomayor stems from a 2005 statement she made describing the role appellate justices have in forming policy, which they claim is akin to an endorsement of “judicial activism.”

“All of the legal defense funds out there, they are looking for people with court of appeals experience because the court of appeals is where policy is made,” she said, laughing a bit through the next part: “And I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. Okay, I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I know.”

But as legal scholars have noted, Sotomayor’s statement is entirely factual:

“She’s not wrong,” said Jeffrey Segal, a professor of law at Stony Brook University. “Of course they make policy… You can, on one hand, say Congress makes the law and the court interprets it. But on the other hand the law is not always clear. And in clarifying those laws, the courts make policy.”

Eric Freedman, a law professor at Hofstra University, was equally dismissive of this emerging conservative talking point. “She was saying something which is the absolute judicial equivalent of saying the sun rises each morning. It is not a controversial proposition at all that the overwhelming quantity of law making work in the federal system is done by the court of appeals… It is thoroughly uncontroversial to anyone other than a determined demagogue.”

Indeed, during her 1997 confirmation hearing, Sotomayor spoke of her judicial philosophy, saying “I don’t believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it.”

Expect the Republicans to complain loudly about this pick. Yes, they know that they can’t stop her, but they can use this pick to attempt to fire up their base and to shake them down for money; they also will try to use this to fire up their 2010 campaign.

Science This is a very interesting and entertaining article about the evolution of the house cat. Have you ever wondered why there is more variation among dog breeds than among cat breeds? Go here to find out; also you might be interested in knowing that the domestic cat really evolved about 10,000 years ago and are, on the whole, less tame than dogs.

Rant of the Day:

No one rants better!

Advertisement