Sotomayor's real downside

I know that many blogs on the right are buzzing with anti-Sotomayor rhetoric and that is fine. The left blogs did the same thing for every Bush nominee and it is to be expected to a certain extent. I have read quite a bit both about the nominee, said nominee's colleagues, her resume and lawyers that have appeared in front of her.

Oh yes, I have also heard the speech at Berkeley and her borderline racist commentary. They will provide plenty of fodder for her to be questioned when she goes through her confirmation hearings. As a matter of fact, they provide plenty of opportunity to have thoughtful questioning of the nominee.

What bothers me about Sotomayor is the repeated suggestion that she 'isn't that smart'. That is not a good trait in a justice of the supreme court. This country survives because of the relationship between the Executive (job needs competence), Legislative(founders built balance into a system that could potentially breed over politicized incompetence - see Pelosi) and the Judicial (requires the maximum competence) branches of government functioning together.

What is the evidence? My first clue is in her 3 out of 6 success rate when her appellate cases were reviewed by the court. Worse, she is likely to also lose the New Haven case which is so clearly unconstitutional. So she could literally be confirmed in time to bring the ultimate jurisprudence losing record to the supreme court.

And that scares me.

---