Published: Wednesday, May 27, 2009
SUPREME COURT NOMINEE
Judges should have empathy
President Obama opened the floodgates for his critics recently when he said that his first Supreme Court nominee should have "empathy." That was just code, some conservatives warned, for a liberal, activist judge.
In choosing Sonia Sotomayor on Tuesday to replace retiring Justice David Souter, Obama clarified his statement. He was looking for someone with intellectual rigor and a brilliant legal resume, but also someone who had seen more than one side of America, a judge who could understand how rulings affect the lives of real people.
Sotomayor, who grew up in a public housing project in the New York City borough of The Bronx, is a truly inspiring American success story, rising from meager beginnings to academic excellence and a noted career as a prosecutor, corporate lawyer and federal judge. She's a legal heavyweight, with more experience on the federal bench than any of the current justices had before joining the Supreme Court. Her rulings don't appear to show an adherence to a particular ideology, suggesting instead a commitment to rulings based on the evidence at hand.
If confirmed by the Senate, she'll also be the first Hispanic to serve on the high court, and only the third woman. In all of U.S. history, there have been 110 Supreme Court justices, and all but four have been white and male. We're not saying white guys aren't capable of empathy, but having the highest court in the land better reflect our nation's growing diversity is surely a step in the direction of fairness, justice and, yes, institutional empathy.
Empathy, despite what some might think, does not equate to sympathy. It doesn't imply a predisposition to favor the perceived underdog. Rather, it's the ability to put oneself in someone else's shoes, a trait to be valued in any judge. Sotomayor's gender, ethnicity, upbringing and professional background should enable her to stand in a wide variety of shoes.
Sotomayor will undergo what we trust will be a rigorous confirmation process, which is as it should be. She'll be asked about her judicial philosophy, and called on to explain the rationale behind many of her rulings. We won't hold it against her if she comes across as empathetic, and even her toughest questioners shouldn't, either.
After all, the Supreme Court is composed of human beings interpreting a Constitution that was written by human beings. We're not looking for an ideological robot.
In choosing Sonia Sotomayor on Tuesday to replace retiring Justice David Souter, Obama clarified his statement. He was looking for someone with intellectual rigor and a brilliant legal resume, but also someone who had seen more than one side of America, a judge who could understand how rulings affect the lives of real people.
Sotomayor, who grew up in a public housing project in the New York City borough of The Bronx, is a truly inspiring American success story, rising from meager beginnings to academic excellence and a noted career as a prosecutor, corporate lawyer and federal judge. She's a legal heavyweight, with more experience on the federal bench than any of the current justices had before joining the Supreme Court. Her rulings don't appear to show an adherence to a particular ideology, suggesting instead a commitment to rulings based on the evidence at hand.
If confirmed by the Senate, she'll also be the first Hispanic to serve on the high court, and only the third woman. In all of U.S. history, there have been 110 Supreme Court justices, and all but four have been white and male. We're not saying white guys aren't capable of empathy, but having the highest court in the land better reflect our nation's growing diversity is surely a step in the direction of fairness, justice and, yes, institutional empathy.
Empathy, despite what some might think, does not equate to sympathy. It doesn't imply a predisposition to favor the perceived underdog. Rather, it's the ability to put oneself in someone else's shoes, a trait to be valued in any judge. Sotomayor's gender, ethnicity, upbringing and professional background should enable her to stand in a wide variety of shoes.
Sotomayor will undergo what we trust will be a rigorous confirmation process, which is as it should be. She'll be asked about her judicial philosophy, and called on to explain the rationale behind many of her rulings. We won't hold it against her if she comes across as empathetic, and even her toughest questioners shouldn't, either.
After all, the Supreme Court is composed of human beings interpreting a Constitution that was written by human beings. We're not looking for an ideological robot.
Comments
(