Sonia Sotomayor
The Public Record
Sonia Sotomayor is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, having been nominated by President Barack Obama in 2009. She is the first Hispanic and Latina member of the Court. Sotomayor previously served as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and as a district court judge for the Southern District of New York. Her judicial philosophy often emphasizes the importance of empathy and the impact of the law on the lives of individuals, particularly marginalized communities.
The court is not a legislative body. It is a reviewing body of whether a particular act by a state in a particular case is constitutional or not.
I believe that my reputation is--is such that I ask the hard questions, but I do it evenly for both sides.
In fact, I know that in my 17 years on the bench, other than applying it in treaty interpretation or conflicts of law situations, that I have not cited to foreign law.
One, in a tragic, tragic, horrible situation like that, can't feel anything but personal sense of regret, but those personal senses can't command a result in a case.
Ignoring things and saying, you know, it doesn't happen isn't an answer to a situation.
I never understood her to be attempting to say that those people who disagreed with her were unwise or unfair judges.
In short, I accept the proposition that difference will be made by the presence of women and people of color on the bench and that my experiences will affect the facts that I choose to see.
A judge should never rule from fear. A judge should rule from law and the Constitution.
My own judgment is that it would seem odd, indeed, if any Justice would sit in review of a decision that they authored.
I know that there are many litigants who have expressed that view, and in fact there's been many State legislators that have passed State legislation not permitting State governments to take in the situation that the Supreme Court approved…
I share your view of the importance of property rights under the Constitution.
I've been and am very cautious about expressing personal views since I've been a judge.
As I said, I--I am hesitant of prejudging and saying they will or won't, because that will be what the parties are going to be arguing in the litigation.
No, sir. In that case we were talking about, and deciding, an issue of whether the agency had followed its own procedures in changing policy.
There are circumstances under which a court should reexamine precedent and perhaps change its direction or perhaps reject it.
Given the announcements of certain groups and the messages that have been sent with videotapes, et cetera, announcing that intent, then the answer would be on--based on that, yes.
I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experience, would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male.
American law does not permit the use of foreign law or international law to interpret the Constitution.
Under no circumstance should the judiciary become the hand maiden of the executive.
In every case I approach, I start from that working proposition and apply the law to the facts before it.





