In her bid to pooh pooh conservative fears (brought on by her judicial record) that she can't be relied upon to apply the law, instead of being a judicial activist, Sotomayor vowed "fidelity to the law" and told the Senate that she had not advocated for policy since she became a judge.
Of course, "advocating" for policy isn't necessary when you can "set policy", as she herself admitted that the Court of Appeals does [2]. And presumably she would know, since she's on the Second Circuit for the Court of Appeals.
In her statement [3]to the Senate, she said:
"In the past month, many senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law," Judge Sotomayor told the Senate Judiciary Committee.
"The task of a judge is not to make the law - it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court."
Now go back and reread that statement and you'll notice something very important. "...my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statues according to their terms and Congress' intent..."
So, in other words, it's OK for her as a judge to apply the intent of Congress to a piece of legislation that may be at issue in a court case, but she says nothing about such commitment to keeping to the "intent" of our Constitution, (such as that of the people who wrote it and ratified it in 1789).
And there you have another case of liberals running away from what the Constitution originally meant, because, when it comes to the supreme law of our land, they prefer something less static...something evolutionary. A "living" Constitution. Which is liberal speak for a Constitution we can change by judicial fiat without having to go to the political trouble of amending it.
***
TAKE ACTION: Contact your senators and tell them "NO" to more liberal judges..."NO" to Sotomayor [4]
