<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sotomayor, Obama and Presidential Power</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/</link>
	<description>A NonPartisan Analysis of Presidential Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:45:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Johnson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/comment-page-1/#comment-3167</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 20:44:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=187#comment-3167</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am not surprised by the choice, which -- like Matt -- I anticipate will move through the Senate without a big battle. Obama simply has entirely too much on his plate -- huge challenges in righting the economy and getting health care legislation, along with humungous problems with Israel &amp; the Palestinians, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan, and North Korea (to mention only the leading cases du jour)-- to risk a Senate shutdown this summer over a Supreme Court nominee.

My concern is that he will take the safe way each time a Court vacancy occurs, and for the same reasons -- too many other challenges to face -- so that we never will get someone &quot;outside the judicial monastery&quot;. 

Constitutional decisions are of too great importance, and involve too many imponderables, to leave them exclusively to judges!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not surprised by the choice, which &#8212; like Matt &#8212; I anticipate will move through the Senate without a big battle. Obama simply has entirely too much on his plate &#8212; huge challenges in righting the economy and getting health care legislation, along with humungous problems with Israel &amp; the Palestinians, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan, and North Korea (to mention only the leading cases du jour)&#8211; to risk a Senate shutdown this summer over a Supreme Court nominee.</p>
<p>My concern is that he will take the safe way each time a Court vacancy occurs, and for the same reasons &#8212; too many other challenges to face &#8212; so that we never will get someone &#8220;outside the judicial monastery&#8221;. </p>
<p>Constitutional decisions are of too great importance, and involve too many imponderables, to leave them exclusively to judges!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/comment-page-1/#comment-3166</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 18:25:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=187#comment-3166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ADDENDUM: Conor Shaw did, in fact, predict the Sotomayer nomination, and for precisely the right reasons, in my view (although he did try to slip in a second choice as well!)  My apologies to Conor for overlooking his victory.  He has singlehandedly restored my faith in the efficacy of a Middlebury College education!  Conor - send me your t-shirt size…]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ADDENDUM: Conor Shaw did, in fact, predict the Sotomayer nomination, and for precisely the right reasons, in my view (although he did try to slip in a second choice as well!)  My apologies to Conor for overlooking his victory.  He has singlehandedly restored my faith in the efficacy of a Middlebury College education!  Conor &#8211; send me your t-shirt size…</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/comment-page-1/#comment-3165</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 18:14:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=187#comment-3165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Conor - Since I mostly (but not consistently!) mispelled Sotomayer through the first edition of my latest post, I can hardly disqualify you for doing the same!  And heresy scores points on this blog.  I&#039;ll go check to confirm your victory.

You make two important points:  according to news reports, Sotomayer did very well in her personal interview with Obama, in part because of her personal narrative (or so we are told.)  More importantly, as the Warren pick reminds us, once a justice is confirmed, presidents lose what little influence they have and all bets are off.  Remember Souter, the stealth justice, proved to be a huge disappointment to Republicans despite being nominated by a Republican president.  My guess is Sotomayer will prove to be an activist, liberal justice - more so than is indicated by her record.  (She is also a Yankees fan, so has probably dabbled in steroids and the dark arts.) But first she needs to be confirmed - it will be interesting to see just how much ammunition the ideologically-oriented interest groups pour into this fight.  My guess is that conservative groups will let this slide since her appointment doesn&#039;t really change the balance of power on the court very much.  They may be marshaling their resources for the next appointee... .]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Conor &#8211; Since I mostly (but not consistently!) mispelled Sotomayer through the first edition of my latest post, I can hardly disqualify you for doing the same!  And heresy scores points on this blog.  I&#8217;ll go check to confirm your victory.</p>
<p>You make two important points:  according to news reports, Sotomayer did very well in her personal interview with Obama, in part because of her personal narrative (or so we are told.)  More importantly, as the Warren pick reminds us, once a justice is confirmed, presidents lose what little influence they have and all bets are off.  Remember Souter, the stealth justice, proved to be a huge disappointment to Republicans despite being nominated by a Republican president.  My guess is Sotomayer will prove to be an activist, liberal justice &#8211; more so than is indicated by her record.  (She is also a Yankees fan, so has probably dabbled in steroids and the dark arts.) But first she needs to be confirmed &#8211; it will be interesting to see just how much ammunition the ideologically-oriented interest groups pour into this fight.  My guess is that conservative groups will let this slide since her appointment doesn&#8217;t really change the balance of power on the court very much.  They may be marshaling their resources for the next appointee&#8230; .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conor Shaw</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/comment-page-1/#comment-3164</link>
		<dc:creator>Conor Shaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 18:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=187#comment-3164</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think you will find that I did pick Sotomayor, albeit at the end of long-winded comment defending the judicial establishment. Was heresy the disqualifying factor, or was is that I misspelled her last name! 

It is very interesting to see where all of the justices in the last 70 years came from - thank you for compiling this list. Taking a cursory look at which Presidents appointed which justices, I am reminded that although we tend to see the Court as pretty easily divided into two separate ideological camps, a considerable number of liberal justices have been appointed by Republican Presidents - Chief Justice Earl Warren being among the most important examples. 

An interesting part of the Sotomayor nomination is that she and Obama share very similar personal narratives (raised be a single mom, immigrant roots, education). I wonder whether that helped Sotomayor when she sat down to interview with Obama.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you will find that I did pick Sotomayor, albeit at the end of long-winded comment defending the judicial establishment. Was heresy the disqualifying factor, or was is that I misspelled her last name! </p>
<p>It is very interesting to see where all of the justices in the last 70 years came from &#8211; thank you for compiling this list. Taking a cursory look at which Presidents appointed which justices, I am reminded that although we tend to see the Court as pretty easily divided into two separate ideological camps, a considerable number of liberal justices have been appointed by Republican Presidents &#8211; Chief Justice Earl Warren being among the most important examples. </p>
<p>An interesting part of the Sotomayor nomination is that she and Obama share very similar personal narratives (raised be a single mom, immigrant roots, education). I wonder whether that helped Sotomayor when she sat down to interview with Obama.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2009/05/26/sotamayor-obama-and-presidential-power/comment-page-1/#comment-3162</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 17:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=187#comment-3162</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good catch Jason -since I include Ginsburg, who also withdrew his nomination before formal Senate hearings began, I should also include Miers.  Most of you will remembered that Miers was pummeled by Democrats for her lack of legal street cred, but especially by conservative Republicans for not being ideologically pure and conservative enough.  She eventually  withdrew her nomination before formal Senate hearings began.  It is still another reason why presidents, including Obama, are wary of choosing practicing politicians - they offer an opportune target for the ideologically-driven interest groups that have dominated court nomination politics since at least the 1980&#039;s as well as legal professionals who judge a nominee&#039;s credentials in large part on her legal background.   In this respect, Sotamayor represents the safer choice.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good catch Jason -since I include Ginsburg, who also withdrew his nomination before formal Senate hearings began, I should also include Miers.  Most of you will remembered that Miers was pummeled by Democrats for her lack of legal street cred, but especially by conservative Republicans for not being ideologically pure and conservative enough.  She eventually  withdrew her nomination before formal Senate hearings began.  It is still another reason why presidents, including Obama, are wary of choosing practicing politicians &#8211; they offer an opportune target for the ideologically-driven interest groups that have dominated court nomination politics since at least the 1980&#8242;s as well as legal professionals who judge a nominee&#8217;s credentials in large part on her legal background.   In this respect, Sotamayor represents the safer choice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
