While at work today, I'm reading the liveblogs of the New York Times and Talking Points Memo of the Sotomayor confirmation hearings.
Two thoughts so far:
1. This conservative idea that judges should not "make law" is a nonsensical appeal to a base that clearly doesn't understand watch the Supreme Court actually does. The idea that the law is fixed, settled by the framers of the Constitution, is false on its face. Furthermore, conservatives have strict litmus tests for judges about Roe v. Wade (among other things) that reveals their true understanding about how judges "make the law." This is why Harriet Miers had to withdraw her nomination. It was because the base of the party didn't believe she was a reliable vote against Roe. Conservatives won't accept a justice that isn't ideologically pure. Which is why Sen. Sessions statements about how "politics have no place in the courtroom" are dark comedy.
There has been no greater judicial activism than that of the conservative movement towards turning the Supreme Court to the right since the 1980s. So far, they've done a terrifyingly good job of winning that fight.
2. Sotomayor will be replacing a liberal vote on the court. So she will not change the "balance" of the court. Essentially, her nomination won't change the status quo of the Court at all. Except that it will have a more diverse face.
- Matthew Freeman is a Brooklyn based playwright with a BFA from Emerson College. His plays include THE DEATH OF KING ARTHUR, REASONS FOR MOVING, THE GREAT ESCAPE, THE AMERICANS, THE WHITE SWALLOW, AN INTERVIEW WITH THE AUTHOR, THE MOST WONDERFUL LOVE, WHEN IS A CLOCK, GLEE CLUB, THAT OLD SOFT SHOE and BRANDYWINE DISTILLERY FIRE. He served as Assistant Producer and Senior Writer for the live webcast from Times Square on New Year's Eve 2010-2012. As a freelance writer, he has contributed to Gamespy, Premiere, Complex Magazine, Maxim Online, and MTV Magazine. His plays have been published by Playscripts, Inc., New York Theatre Experience, and Samuel French.