The Heritage Foundation comments on the Sotomayor hearings here by quoting her answers to tough questions from conservative senators. Her answers could have come from Scalia or Thomas. In fact on the use of international law, she does agree with them.
?I have actually agreed with Justice Scalia and
Thomas on the point that one has to be very cautious even in using
foreign law with respect to the things American law permits you to. And
that?s in treaty interpretation or in conflicts of law because it?s a
different system of law.?
She rejects the “living Constitution” doctrine so dear to the heart of liberals. She even rejects Obama’s “empathy” standard for judging cases. Accusing her of telling them what they want to hear is a gross understatement.
Heritage concludes with this:
Was Sotomayor being honest with the Senate Judiciary
Committee with these answers? We don?t know. That is a decision each
Senator will have to make on their own. At bare minimum though,
Sotomayor?s testimony proves that the left is unwilling to defend the
core of their judicial beliefs in a public forum. As the New York Times
reports: ?By forcing Judge Sotomayor to retreat from Mr. Obama?s desire
for justices with ?empathy,? Republicans have effectively set a new
standard that future nominees will be pressed to meet. ? Several legal
experts said Judge Sotomayor?s testimony might make it harder for Mr.
Obama to name a more liberal justice next time.?
