Ignoring Alito, Thomas, Wash. Post labels judicial empathy a "liberal" idea
SUMMARY: The Washington Post characterized the view "that a judge should have empathy" as "an idea floating within liberal legal thought," ignoring numerous conservatives who have also stressed the importance of personal experience and compassion in judicial nominees.
In a July 19 article, The Washington Post characterized the view "that a judge should have empathy" as "an idea floating within liberal legal thought," ignoring that numerous conservatives, including Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, have also stressed the importance of their personal experience and praised compassion as a judicial attribute.
The Post reported that during her confirmation hearings, Judge Sonia Sotomayor "distanced herself from public remarks off the bench that, according to the GOP, suggest a gender and ethnic bias. She distanced herself, too, from [President] Obama's view that a judge should have empathy -- an idea floating within liberal legal thought." The article also reported that Doug Kendall, president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, "said liberal legal thinkers must devise new ways to build public support for their ideas to make it easier for Obama to pick outspoken judges," and quoted him saying, "Neither the old progressive idea about the living Constitution nor the new idea of judicial empathy have polled very well."
In fact, then-President George H.W. Bush cited Thomas' "great empathy" when he announced his selection of Thomas to serve on the Supreme Court. And during his confirmation hearing, Thomas cited personal experience as "a contribution" he would make to the court. Thomas said: "And I believe, Senator, that I can make a contribution, that I can bring something different to the Court, that I can walk in the shoes of the people who are affected by what the Court does. You know, on my current court I have occasion to look out the window that faces C Street, and there are converted buses that bring in the criminal defendants to our criminal justice system, bus load after bus load. And you look out and you say to yourself, and I say to myself almost every day, 'But for the grace of God there go I.' "
More recently, during his confirmation hearings in 2006, Alito highlighted his compassion for people involved in immigration and discrimination cases and discussed the importance of his personal experience. Alito stated: "When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."
From the July 19 Washington Post article:
Sotomayor has been on the federal bench for 17 years, first as a trial judge in Manhattan and, since 1998, as a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit. She has a record of rulings that even Senate Republicans said fits within the judicial mainstream.
At her hearings, she distanced herself from public remarks off the bench that, according to the GOP, suggest a gender and ethnic bias. She distanced herself, too, from Obama's view that a judge should have empathy -- an idea floating within liberal legal thought. And she concealed her views on issues important to the left, including abortion, gun control and same-sex marriage, as well as the civil rights matters Cardin raised.
[...]
Jeff Sessions (Ala.), the Senate Judiciary Committee's ranking Republican, said the White House and Democrats have been hobbled because, despite Democrats' strong victories in recent elections, public attitudes have not moved correspondingly. "The left's view of judges is not supported by the people," Sessions said.
Kendall said liberal legal thinkers must devise new ways to build public support for their ideas to make it easier for Obama to pick outspoken judges. "Neither the old progressive idea about the living Constitution nor the new idea of judicial empathy have polled very well," he said.
As it is, [Rep. Jerrold] Nadler [D-NY] said, "it will take a president with a lot of nerve" to nominate a justice substantially further to the left.
n. in criminal law, conditions or happenings which do not excuse or justify criminal conduct, but are considered out of mercy or fairness in deciding the degree of the offense the prosecutor charges or influencing reduction of the penalty upon conviction. Example: a young man shoots his father after years of being beaten, belittled, sworn at and treated without love. "Heat of passion" or "diminished capacity" are forms of such mitigating circumstances. www.law.com.
It is only because President O'Bama chose to use the term that this is even thought provoking. Maybe to some it sounded like affirmative action, end of barbarianism, or free the slaves even. Any who, the point is that empathy is a legal remedy in fitting for the correct punitive resolution. As in the words of the Honorable Sandra Day O'Connor, "it is a totality of the circumstances". That phrase implies empathy. Wether any particular group likes it or not, it is a calculating judicial policy tool that is effective in the consideration of one's life or death, what is legal or illegal, and what has relevance in the culpablity of criminal defendants and litigants. Word it any way you like: this is not a liberal, conservative, or democratic argument, it is again an argument of semantics. "and that's all folks"....Porky the Pig.
The republicans get a conservative justice and still can use the so called liberal Sotomayor to raise funds. Session's credibility is zero but the SCLM allows the conservative's views to go largely unchallenged.
Now, if Obama wanted to have say the liberal equivalent of Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, or Alito, we'd never hear the end of it, and republicans would be crying foul all the way to the whine bank.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/empathy-sotomayor-and-dem_b_209406.html
He makes some good points. here is an excerpt from the article:
Let's start with the attack on empathy. Why empathy? Isn't empathy a good thing?
Empathy is at the heart of progressive thought. It is the capacity to put oneself in the shoes of others -- not just individuals, but whole categories of people: one's countrymen, those in other countries, other living beings, especially those who are in some way oppressed, threatened, or harmed. Empathy is the capacity to care, to feel what others feel, to understand what others are facing and what their lives are like. Empathy extends well beyond feeling to understanding, and it extends beyond individuals to groups, communities, peoples, even species. Empathy is at the heart of real rationality, because it goes to the heart of our values, which are the basis of our sense of justice.
Progressives care about others as well as themselves. They have a moral obligation to act on their empathy -- a social responsibility in addition to personal responsibility, a responsibility to make the world better by making themselves better. This leads to a view of a government that cares about its citizens and has a moral obligation to protect and empower them. Protection includes worker, consumer, and environmental protection as well as safety nets and health care. Empowerment includes what is in the president's stimulus plan: infrastructure, education, communication, energy, the availability of credit from banks, a stock market that works. No one can earn anything at all in this country without protection and empowerment by the government. All progressive legislation is made on this basis.
The only reason they don't like it all of a sudden is because they've run out of things to complain about, but still feel like they need to do further complaining.
Why is it that when Republicans don't get their way, they hide from all logic?