The Supreme Court: It is not SUPPOSED to be Empathetic

The Supreme Court is not supposed to be an agenda-forwarding body. The Supreme Court is not a political toy. It is not supposed to be a body that determines the future of the nation based on personal feelings, experiences, backgrounds, ethnicities, or any other personal fiat.

The job...the duty...the responsibility of a Supreme Court justice is to interpret the law as it applies to the Constitution. The Supreme Court is not a higher power than the Executive or Legislative branches of the federal government. No branch of government is supposed to answer to or beholden to the whims of nine people on the bench of the highest court in the land.

Supreme Court justices are supposed to be impartial to each case they hear. They are to take themselves out of the case and judge each case on its own merits, and apply applicable laws to the case. The laws from which they are to draw are supposed to be exclusively from the Constitution of the United States.

For the last century or so, the Supreme Court has veered far, far left of center and has led the way for activists to enact change in the United States, and, in the process, has usurped the powers of the legislative and executive branches of the federal government.

With the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Obama has opened a Pandora's Box of issues with this Judge's idea of her responsibilities. As I am sure you have heard, Sotomayor made some questionable remarks about ethnicity and ability to judge cases.

First, I agree with the arguement that had the roles been reversed, no matter what the context, and a white male had said his experiences allow for wiser decisions that a Latin-American woman, he would be vilified until he would have to step down from any bench he could concievably sit upon. That man would no longer be able to touch a gavel in a United States court. A white man saying he is better at anything than a woman, minority, or a minority woman would lose everything he has ever worked for because he would be labeled, attacked, and crucified in the media and by even his closest political allies. Sotomayor, like any minority, gets a pass because white males have no rights and no protections from racist or hate comments. Its true. White males are not protected. We have no protections, no right to get upset, no inclination to fight and complain when we are attacked and left out for no other reason than our gender and color.

I can get over that. It's the hip thing to down white guys nowadays. We are the political whipping boys anymore. Fine.

My real problem with the comments is that Sotomayor is telling us that she relies on her background to interpret the law. Not her studies. Not her familiarity with precedents and the verbage of the Constitution (you know, the document that is the basis upon which ALL Supreme Court decisions should be made). Instead, because she is a Latin American woman, she has the experiences to make judicial decisions.

So, getting back to the original points at the beginning of this rant. The job of a judge, regardless of level, whether it be the Tazewell County Courthouse in Virginia, or the 9th Circut Court in California, or the US Supreme Court, is to use the words and meanings of the Constitution of the United States.

Not the laws of England. Not the governing documents of France or Germany. Not the laws and precedents of courts in South America, Europe, or Asia.

The US Constitution, and then the individual states' Constitutions.

Nothing else.

Not empathy for individuals. Empathy is fine, but it should not determine justice. Lady justice is blindfolded for a reason. She does not have one eye exposed to look down mercifully upon a purposed victim. Lady Justice weighs the evidence and the rule of law. That's it.

It is all well and good to show pity, empathy, and compassion on an individual basis. In fact, I encourage it. I think that it is truly American to help those in need when possible. I do not think it is the job of a Supreme Court justice to show caring and concern with their binding decisions on the court.

And neither did the framers.