Wait for more information before endorsing
I am astounded at the speed of endorsement that The Times editorial staff laid upon the Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor [“A persuasive choice,” Opinion, editorial, May 29].
Perhaps she is fully qualified, but the research into her background has barely begun and hearings are weeks off. There is no way, with the limited information thus far, that The Times can legitimately endorse her.
What do we know so far? She is intimately involved in the pending Supreme Court case of Frank Ricci, dealing with a reverse discrimination case of significance. She has had three of five of her majority opinions overturned by the Supreme Court. She has declared that by virtue of gender and race alone, a Latina woman would make better decisions than white males. Lastly, she has openly stated that the Circuit Court of Appeals is where “policy is made.”
She may have solid, defensible rationale behind all of this, but shouldn’t we hear her out first before endorsing? Why did you jump to this conclusion so fast? Could it be political?
— Jim Johnson, Kirkland
Stand up for constitutional rights — just say no
Short and sweet — haven’t read anything that justifies this nomination over any other possible candidate.
If you value your constitutional rights, and specifically the Second Amendment, as patriotic citizens it is our duty to stand up against this nomination.
The choice is clear — just say NoTo SoTo.
— Daniel Schitkovitz, Kirkland