The media are treating the American Bar Association's top rating for Judge Sonia Sotomayor like a dispassionate report card. The record shows that the ABA applies a politicized double standard.
The ABA's Canons of Judicial Ethics have a lot of high-minded language. Such as: "To ensure impartiality and fairness to all parties, a judge must be objective and open-minded." And: "A judge shall not . . . by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice," including but not limited to "bias . . . based upon race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity . . . ."
And why not? Because "a judge who manifests bias or prejudice in a proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings the judiciary into disrepute. A judge must avoid conduct that may reasonably be perceived as prejudiced or biased."
The very definition of "conduct that may reasonably be perceived as prejudiced or biased" can be found in Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's statements on race. She has claimed — over and over, it turns out — 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."
The unmistakable assertion: A "wise Latina woman" is morally superior to those of another race and the other sex.
The ABA further insists that "a judge shall not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity or sexual orientation."
But Sotomayor violated that too, until recently holding membership in an all-female "old girls" club whose only purpose is networking to empower its already elitist members. ...
Read the rest here.