Holding that separate but equal facilities for African Americans are NOT constitutional--overrulling Plessy v. Ferguson. Interestingly, the majority opinion in Brown essentially adopts the minority opinion in Plessy. An example of how provisions in the Constitution are essentially meaningless until addressed by the High Nine is Weeks v. U.S. (1914), where the Court unanimously created the Exclusionary Rule--giving teeth to the "unreasonable search/seizure" provisions of the 4th Amendment. That amendment was there since 1787, but was meaningless until the Court ruled that evidence obtained in violation of Constitution is not allowed in court.

Brown vs the Board of Education of Topeka Kansas

kinsohn
.
I understand your point and do not condone what she said BUT...
.
There is a difference when a minority makes a comment like that and a white male. See, white males often did the disciminating so they can't get away with saying a discriminatory comment like that.
.
People who grew up black in the segregated South can refer to their experiences but a white guy, it just doesn't work.
.
I understand the point she wanted to make but I agree, she did a horrible job of making it.
.
I don't think she is a racist because of these comments.
.
When did she make these comments?

99--before you start throwing the word 'idiot' and 'moron' around, check your facts. While you are right in a TECHNICAL sense that the 13th Amendment abolished slavery, in REAL terms, nothing happened until the Supremes started getting involved. Also, kins--go back and listen to Alito's confirmation hearings three years ago. He said almost EXACTLY that!!! Sorry....

"Without activist judges we would still have slavery, jim crow and women without any rights. Amen for activist judges"

Darwin,
You have to be the biggest idiot on the planet. abolishing slavery and womens rights were dealt with by constitutional amendment not acitvist judges you moron. Activist judges gave us Roe vs Wade and affirmative action

Why has no one addressed the woman's clearly racist comments? Had Judge Alito said his background as a white male would allow him to make better judgements than a latina woman, he would have been burned at the stake! Why is what she said no cause for concern? We all know the answer: racism and sexism is OK as long as the right gender and races are being discriminated against. There's no other answer.

On a side note, will someone explain to me why the media thinks that anyone really cares what Newt Gingrich thinks? This was the guy who, while excoriating Clinton for the Lewinsky affair, was having his own intra-office affair. Of course, this was after he served his wife--in the hospital, dying of cancer--with divorce papers. If there is anyone besides Cheney who is more irrelevant these days, it's Newt.

“It appears that the wise men of the Republican party have decided that they can do without the Hispanic vote for a generation.”
-
Really? Did the Democrats lose the Hispanic vote when they filibustered Miguel Estrada’s nomination to the circuit court of appeals after failing to block it in committee? The Senate has a job to do, the confirmation process. It’s not like the Republican’s went to the floor of the senate 45 minutes after a the President released her name and give a righteous indignation speech like Ted Kennedy did of a nominees he did not like.

It appears that the wise men of the Republican party have decided that they can do without the Hispanic vote for a generation. At least, one may judge this from the gloves-off approach of Gingrich and Limbaugh. About the only one with some sense, bizarrely enough, is the famously intemperate and erratic Michael Steele. Ponder that one.

partarican1-Would you mind explaining this quote of yours,"It is natures creation, IMO. Don't confuse religion with science, IMO."?
http://gazettextra.com/weblogs/latest-ne...

"She's a liberal way out there nut case..."

I'm curious how you formed this opinion of her. Are you a closet judicial scholar, or are you repeating someones talking points? ...hhhmmm...

For those of you who really care to learn more about the newest Supreme Court nominee, here is an excerpt from her speech that many have taken out of context, and a link to the WHOLE speech.

"Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/pol...

Without activist judges we would still have slavery, jim crow and women without any rights. Amen for activist judges.

Activist judge, n. (American politics) Phrase indicating jurist who doesn't check with Heritage Foundation before filing opinion.

grininear2ear- I believe what she meant was that she would make decisions based on her beliefs, gender, and heritage; similar to the way other judges make their decisions based on the same reasons. Interpretation of the laws are subject to individuals who enforce them.

15yearsthere- thank you. I am not familiar with the whole text jargon thing, and I believe people are lazy when they do so; just my opinion.

whythink- She's Puerto Rican, just like me. Not from Mexico.

And I suppose all of you that are screaming about her being liberal, were just as hysterical when Roberts and Alito were appointed? Because, they sure are moderate. How two-faced!

"I simply do not know exactly what the difference will be in my judging," "But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage."
What happened to upholding the laws of the land regardless of sex or race? So now he will appoint a racist as a Supreme Court Judge? Time for a Constitutional Congress.

She's a liberal way out there nut case just like alot of the people in office and in power right now! I'm not saying she can't do the job because she'latino, I'm saying I don't like her left wing bias. I don't care what race they are, I am Irish and welch, I just don't like the liberal way she swings!

When the Supreme Court, or an Appeals Court interpret a law and rule on a case they are making "policy." That is all she said besides, "I`m not advocating it."I`m not promoting it." Many legal scholars agree with her. It is not controversial.

To everyone suggesting she is radical, wow, try something other than Fox News.
.
In 400 cases she only overturned 5.
.
When sitting on a 3 member panel an overwhelming amount of her decisions had a republican agreeing with her.
.
She isn't radical. She may be slighly liberal but taking the Hannity talking points quote likely out of context isn't who she is. She has a huge amount of experience and to the liberals, true liberals I have talked with...She is way to conservative.
.
Obviously she is going to agree with the President more than she disagrees... one of the perks of being elected President you get to appoint Friends instead of enemies to the Supreme Court...SHOCKING!
.
The partisan politics are pretty pathetic if you ask me.
.
Suggestion: If you rely on Fox, hannity and Rush for your news try MSNBC, 92.1 FM or 820am to balance things out. Mix things up, you may be suprised at how moderate the current adminstration is.
.
Trust me, in the past month, the liberals at times, have gotten just about as upset with Obama as the conservatives.

partarican1
May 27, 2009 at 10:35 a.m.
Suggest removal I hope she gets in. It's time the "good ole boy" system is thrown out the window for good. She has the credentials, experience, and knowhow to get where she is, and she will do our country a great service when she gets sworn in. Just because she's Latina does not mean she's unamerican. It makes her even moreso because she had to overcome more obstacles to be in the position she is in, and she is a credit to society, not a drain. Her ancestors came here just like everyone elses ancestors who are not native american. Xenophobes beware. Your days are numbered...
.
Actually there is a good chance that her ancestors are from what is now the USA. Many Latinos(as) were forced from this land to Mexico and elsewhere and later returned.

Supreme Court Duties:

1)Interpret the law
2) Exercise the power of judicial review
3)Chief Justice presides over trials of presidential impeachment.

Judicial review:

1)Determine if laws passed by Congress are allowable by the Constitution
2)Determine if treaties negotiated by the President and approved by the Senate are allowable by the Constitution
3)Determine if actions by the President in enforcing the law are allowable by the Constitution
4)Determine if laws passed by states are allowable by the Constitution

Jurisdiction (Supreme Court):

The Supreme Court hears cases of appeal from lower federal and state courts
The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction (may hear a case first) in cases involving a state vs. state matter or a branch vs. branch matter.

Where here does it give the Supreme court the right to make policy?

IMO=in my opinion

What the hell does IMO mean?

As I was taught in school there are three equal branches of government -- legislative, executive, and judicial. I don't know what is "disturbing" about policy being shaped by any of those branches. In fact, there is a strong desire for the judicial branch to shape American policy in a conservative direction. It is only liberal interpretations of the law that are considered "disturbing".
.
Also, the word "racism" does not mean that someone mentioned race or ethnicity. In fact, using the word in that way disguises real racism.

Yet again the blindfold on lady justice is threatened.This women is a biased,ideological nightmare imo.
As for president Obama (Barry Soetoro), many of us don't expect him to "fix" everything right away.But we do expect him to get the ball rolling in the right direction, wich we sure are not seeing imo.

Her comments about using the position of judge to "make policy" vs. interpret law is very disturbing. I would also like to see a white male judge get away with her racist comments without being attacked, as changed below:

"I would hope that a wise White man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Hispanic female who hasn't lived that life."

Whoanellie - If you actually READ what I posted, I NEVER said Obama was a SAVIOR. I said it's ridiculous how people expect him to fix 8 years of mistakes in a matter of MONTHS. Get your facts straight before you post.

whoanellie- what's the deal? Do you have any non-sarcastic comments on the subject?

I hope she gets in. It's time the "good ole boy" system is thrown out the window for good. She has the credentials, experience, and knowhow to get where she is, and she will do our country a great service when she gets sworn in. Just because she's Latina does not mean she's unamerican. It makes her even moreso because she had to overcome more obstacles to be in the position she is in, and she is a credit to society, not a drain. Her ancestors came here just like everyone elses ancestors who are not native american. Xenophobes beware. Your days are numbered...

Yeah! Obama is the savior!! He's sure getting us out!! LOL!

Wow here we go again. People going around pointing fingers and saying how "unamerican" people are. Give me a break. UNAMERICAN is running our country down to almost nothing in a matter of 8 years. It sickens me how people expect Obama to fix everything that has happened from the Bush-era in a matter of months. Give it up!

Heaven help us!!!! This woman is as unamerican as the man who nominated her!!!!I bet she doesn't even like apple pie!!!

RAF
.
Now be fair and go back and find all the comments about how UnAmerican and divisive the democrats were when politicizing an appointment to the US Supreme Court.
.
Again, both sides are hypocrites on many of these matters. Unfortunately many of you like RAF, are so partisan you can't see it.
.
The Republicans complained about the Democrats doing EXACTLY what they are doing right now. Heck, the Republicans were opposing this pick before anyone, including Obama, knew who it would be.
.
The Democrats will respond how the Republicans did, by calling it divisive and political and the next time an Rep is in the White House do the exact thing the Republicans are doing now while being called too partisan.
.
The hypocrisy of our political system is alive and well. Both the politicans and those who define themselves as Rep or Dem fall for it every time.

What would you call a white male who lives a Latina woman's life?

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life," - Judge Sotomayor, 2002

Who said racism isn't alive and well in America?

“They oppose her at their peril," Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York said”
-
Nice statement Senator. Only 2 years ago you said that “the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush…we should reverse the presumption of confirmation…the Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Stevens replaced by another Roberts..or Alito.” So, it is Ok for the Senate democrats to oppose a nomination but not Ok for Senate Republican’s. Gosh I love to see how well our elected officials represent the people of our country. Truly stand-up class act, makes me so proud.