Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Renew Deal

(81,802 posts)
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 10:33 AM Jun 2016

CNN: Is Sotomayor the new Scalia?

That's their headline. Here is the other one...

Sonia Sotomayor channels liberal voice on Supreme Court

On the losing end of a 5-3 decision regarding police searches without a warrant, Sonia Sotomayor last week unleashed a withering dissent. With direct references to Ferguson, Missouri, and a reading list of black authors including Ta-Nehisi Coates and W.E.B Du Bois, Sotomayor took the majority to task for ignoring the realities on the ground.

"This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants -- even if you are doing nothing wrong," she told her audience. And then she took things a step further, rejecting the majority's contention that the stop at hand could be considered an isolated instance.

"We must not pretend that the countless people who are routinely targeted by police are 'isolated," she said. "They are the canaries in the coal mine whose deaths, civil and literal, warn us that no one can breathe in this atmosphere."

To some, she has become the liberals' answer to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, asking tough questions of lawyers and delivering fierce opinions with -- at times -- searing language.

"Like Justice Scalia, Jutice Sotomayor has the ability to take on her colleagues on the court when she thinks they are wrong, while at the same time speaking to the public at large in colorful, evocative, often fiery language," said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the progressive Constitutional Accountability Center.
<snip>

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/29/politics/sonia-sotomayor-supreme-court-liberal-voice/index.html

85 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
CNN: Is Sotomayor the new Scalia? (Original Post) Renew Deal Jun 2016 OP
No ... Sotomayor is faithful to stari decisius. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #1
stare... n/t xocet Jun 2016 #32
Oops, auto-correct. 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2016 #36
Misleading title. bjobotts Jun 2016 #42
Please Sonia has a brain...they're not at all similar...nt joeybee12 Jun 2016 #2
And ethics. They couldn't be more dissimilar. Hortensis Jun 2016 #18
Also, she has read and studied the constitution... joeybee12 Jun 2016 #33
Exactly. Not the one he felt should be the real one Hortensis Jun 2016 #35
Scalia had a brain wryter2000 Jun 2016 #48
She also has a heart (n/t) PJMcK Jun 2016 #53
Is Sotomayor a self-important asshole with a god complex? Orrex Jun 2016 #3
+1000. Paladin Jun 2016 #4
I continue to celebrate his death with each rising sun. Orrex Jun 2016 #6
My sentiments exactly. (nt) Paladin Jun 2016 #17
Justice Ginsberg does not share your sentiment yeoman6987 Jun 2016 #83
I can respect RBG without sharing her opinion of Scalia. (nt) Paladin Jun 2016 #84
Me too. irisblue Jun 2016 #29
You are going to upset the faint of heart here... Human101948 Jun 2016 #31
I don't think that I could make that outfit work for me Orrex Jun 2016 #45
I apologize if I'm not understanding the context CheRan Jun 2016 #71
Well, I don't jump up and dance around the room Hortensis Jun 2016 #37
Do you think that Scalia was the reason they settled? Human101948 Jun 2016 #73
same here. nt TeamPooka Jun 2016 #39
+1 tallahasseedem Jun 2016 #68
+1000! DemonGoddess Jun 2016 #14
CNN lost on Jeopardy. Rex Jun 2016 #82
Up yours CNN 47of74 Jun 2016 #5
+1 Johonny Jun 2016 #7
+ 1 lsewpershad Jun 2016 #23
+ 1000 BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #27
That was my initial reaction, too PJMcK Jun 2016 #57
on facebook there was another post about liberal media...and then i see crap like this dembotoz Jun 2016 #8
All I have to say is she's a great pick. Kudos to her, and to Obama for picking her. brush Jun 2016 #9
ITA!!! (eom) StevieM Jun 2016 #49
ITA? Don't know that one. brush Jun 2016 #60
ITA means "I totally agree." And eom means "end of message." (eom) StevieM Jun 2016 #70
Even asking that question (CNN) is an insult to Sotomayor IMHO Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2016 #10
Maybe, but it is framed in a complimentary way. Renew Deal Jun 2016 #11
If CNN is complimenting her Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2016 #12
Although I agree with you Renew Deal Jun 2016 #15
I call it "praising her with faint damns...." Feck 'em. n/t TygrBright Jun 2016 #24
Ah, the fucking false equivalence game again n2doc Jun 2016 #13
I actually think Alito is worse Renew Deal Jun 2016 #16
Gotta Disagree, RD ProfessorGAC Jun 2016 #19
Funny Renew Deal Jun 2016 #25
true NewJeffCT Jun 2016 #20
Or, the sometimes humourous wit. Surya Gayatri Jun 2016 #44
I could post that on FB & shake up the day. CrispyQ Jun 2016 #40
Someone once said, Alito is Scalia lite.. mountain grammy Jun 2016 #62
Nope, she's not...but Liberalagogo Jun 2016 #21
CNN is Pox news in a cheap disguise The Wizard Jun 2016 #75
Is CNN a news channel? BlueMTexpat Jun 2016 #22
CNN, lol: my, what depths they've come to plumb. closeupready Jun 2016 #26
I think she's the new Marshall. hollowdweller Jun 2016 #28
You've got to be kidding. klook Jun 2016 #30
No. False equivalency is false. Politicub Jun 2016 #34
Precisely. False Equivalncy is the false god of MSM. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #38
What a pile! lark Jun 2016 #41
Rah rah! Hulk Jun 2016 #65
He was a partisan hack who argued opposing views of the same law depending on who was POTUS. Zen Democrat Jun 2016 #80
UGH ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #43
I see what they mean treestar Jun 2016 #46
No. malthaussen Jun 2016 #47
Sonia Sotomayer is IMO the best justice appointed the court in the last 60 years since Brennan StevieM Jun 2016 #50
Well, no. Else You Are Mad Jun 2016 #51
What a stupid headline. "They're exactly the same, in that they're total opposites!" Svafa Jun 2016 #52
CNN Else You Are Mad Jun 2016 #55
As news professionals know, many people read ONLY headlines. So, CNN's headline is an attempt to merrily Jun 2016 #54
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel Jun 2016 #56
My headline... Mike Nelson Jun 2016 #58
What an insult to a fine jurist mcar Jun 2016 #59
Is CNN the new Faux? benld74 Jun 2016 #61
Sotomayor is a far far better jurist than Scalia ever hoped to be. nt Hekate Jun 2016 #63
Is CNN a cesspool of innuendo groveling for viewers? Xipe Totec Jun 2016 #64
CNN: The Place for False Equivalencies. Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2016 #66
Except that she isn't bat-shit insane AwakeAtLast Jun 2016 #67
it is insulting to compare her to Scalia Skittles Jun 2016 #69
Certainly Not News lives up to its moniker yet again Feeling the Bern Jun 2016 #72
Scalia perverted the law The Wizard Jun 2016 #74
Well, to play devils advocate. frankieallen Jun 2016 #76
You are incorrect bluejaylane Jun 2016 #77
I don't think Scalia was a great legal mind so much as he was kind of a Zig Zigler bs master of Todays_Illusion Jun 2016 #78
As someone has already mentioned it's a misleading title n/t lordsummerisle Jun 2016 #79
The general response to this OP is about as odd as it gets Renew Deal Jun 2016 #81
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2016 #85

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
18. And ethics. They couldn't be more dissimilar.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:40 AM
Jun 2016

But if she starts flying around to secret meetings with very wealthy people like the court's most outstanding conservative revisionist did, we really shouldn't wait for her to drop dread to notice.

 

joeybee12

(56,177 posts)
33. Also, she has read and studied the constitution...
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 12:23 PM
Jun 2016

the real one, not the one that existed in Scalia's tiny mind.

Paladin

(28,204 posts)
4. +1000.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 10:53 AM
Jun 2016

I'm so profoundly grateful for Scalia being permanently absent from the bench, unable to do any further judicial harm.....

Orrex

(63,086 posts)
6. I continue to celebrate his death with each rising sun.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 10:54 AM
Jun 2016

If that makes me a bad person, then I don't want to be a good one.

 

Human101948

(3,457 posts)
31. You are going to upset the faint of heart here...
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 12:21 PM
Jun 2016

They are extremely upset over my grave dancing.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
37. Well, I don't jump up and dance around the room
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 12:46 PM
Jun 2016

with each new day that he isn't on the court, but I sure had my husband staring on the first new day.

Btw, Dow Chemical, which had appealed a case to SCOTUS when Scalia was on it, dropped the case and settled a $1+ billion anti-trust judgement for $835 million. So I'm guessing they didn't dance.

 

47of74

(18,470 posts)
5. Up yours CNN
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 10:53 AM
Jun 2016

CNN, Sotomayor has a brain. Sotomayor has basic human decency. And Sotomayor isn't in the pocket of reich wingers.

Up yours CNN.

PJMcK

(21,921 posts)
57. That was my initial reaction, too
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 02:21 PM
Jun 2016

CNN is not even a shadow of the amazing news network it was originally.

The attempt to create an equivalency between Justice Sotomayor and the (thankfully) late Justice Scalia is ridiculous.

CNN is the epitome of false journalism perfectly represented by their "star," Wolf Blitzer.

Mr. Blitzer, you're an idiot.

Proud Liberal Dem

(24,355 posts)
12. If CNN is complimenting her
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:26 AM
Jun 2016

aren't they basically comparing Scalia- who has no positive qualities AFAIC- favorably to her?

Renew Deal

(81,802 posts)
15. Although I agree with you
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:34 AM
Jun 2016

CNN's comments about Scalia are in line with popular thought. The other way of looking at it is that if someone said "Jutice Sotomayor has the ability to take on her colleagues on the court when she thinks they are wrong, while at the same time speaking to the public at large in colorful, evocative, often fiery language" we would be happy with that.

By the way, the person that said that is "Elizabeth Wydra, president of the progressive Constitutional Accountability Center."

n2doc

(47,953 posts)
13. Ah, the fucking false equivalence game again
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:27 AM
Jun 2016

No, CNN, the new Scalia is Alito. He's his ideological and dishonesty crown heir.

ProfessorGAC

(64,425 posts)
19. Gotta Disagree, RD
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:42 AM
Jun 2016

There is something far less smug and self-important about Alito.

Like you, i don't like his politics or his interpretation of justice, but he doesn't act like everything he says and writes were from stone tablets handed down by god.

Scalia did. He had such disdain for anyone who disagreed because he was so sure that anybody who disagreed was just too stupid to understand his brilliance. (and i use that last word advisedly.)

NewJeffCT

(56,827 posts)
20. true
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:48 AM
Jun 2016

at least Scalia could laugh at himself. At Stephen Colbert's breakout performance at the White House correspondent's dinner many years ago, while Bush looked rather pissed at Colbert, Scalia was laughing uproariously as Colbert mocked him. And, Scalia went out of his way to shake Colbert's hand afterwards and tell him he did a great job.

mountain grammy

(26,571 posts)
62. Someone once said, Alito is Scalia lite..
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 02:46 PM
Jun 2016

I figured the reference was to their weight.

Great cartoon!

The Wizard

(12,482 posts)
75. CNN is Pox news in a cheap disguise
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 09:25 PM
Jun 2016

They lurched to the right after Pox came on the air and took a substantial piece of their audience. The rightward lurch was an attempt to regain the lost viewers. that strategy backfired. The Pox converts never returned and they lost many who noticed they were a less blatant form of right wing propaganda than Pox.

BlueMTexpat

(15,349 posts)
22. Is CNN a news channel?
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:53 AM
Jun 2016

It bears as much resemblance to the journalism of my youth as Scalia does to Sotomayor. That is to say practically none.

klook

(12,134 posts)
30. You've got to be kidding.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 12:16 PM
Jun 2016

This figures, coming from a "news" outlet that can't distinguish between style and substance.

Politicub

(12,163 posts)
34. No. False equivalency is false.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 12:26 PM
Jun 2016

And this article has a whiff of sexism about it.

Sotomayor is blazing her own trail. It has nothing to do with Scalia.

Just like the man himself, Sacalism is dead.

lark

(23,003 posts)
41. What a pile!
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 01:01 PM
Jun 2016

Other than being passionate, she is nothing at all like no ethics Scalia. She cares about the law and about common folks. He was actually against the constitution, saying we should be governed by the Bible instead. He cared nothing for conflict of interests, taking a paid duck hunting trip with Cheney 2 weeks before Cheney's case came before him and refused to recuse himself. He is the most sickly partisan judge that I have seen on SCOTUS during my lifetime. He had nothing but scorn for working class people and the rich could do no harm, per him. He was a total pile of excrement and his absence makes our country a better place.

Zen Democrat

(5,901 posts)
80. He was a partisan hack who argued opposing views of the same law depending on who was POTUS.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:07 PM
Jun 2016

He is the primary reason George W. was named president. Fat Tony was the Selector Justice.

And those are some of the better things about the man. I don't even want to get into the DC v. Heller decision. It's no mystery why mass murders have become commonplace, and why President Obama has been POTUS during an unprecedented period of catastrophic mass murder. Heller was decided in 2008, and it was Scalia's baby.

ismnotwasm

(41,921 posts)
43. UGH
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 01:07 PM
Jun 2016

Who the hell is this Ariane De Vouge person? This is not only bullshit, it's deliberate bullshit.

Here is a bio from 2002, she sounds like a reporters version of an ambulance chaser

ARIANE DE VOGUE (investigative reporter, ABC)
The tall, French-bred, Indiana-raised beauty has no interest in being on air, or even toting a camera crew behind her. "She's a reporter's reporter," says one on-air correspondent who has worked with her. (Or, as de Vogue puts it: "I could never keep my hair combed long enough.&quot De Vogue had intended to become a print reporter, beginning her career as a researcher for the Baltimore Sun's Washington bureau. But after taking time off to travel and landing in Los Angeles without money or a job, she pursued an opening as a national researcher at ABC. She spent two years there on the fire and earthquake, Menendez brothers and O.J. beat, making a big enough impression to earn a transfer to the network's Washington bureau and the title of investigative reporter. Her first assignment was then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his emerging ethics problems. Thereafter, whenever a big story hit, de Vogue has been brought in to investigate--campaign finance, the Unabomber, the TWA crash, impeachment, Enron. Her work on the Ford-Firestone defective tire story helped earn an Emmy nomination for the network. As an off-air investigator, she can stay on the same story for weeks, often switching correspondents, while the on-air personalities are forced to follow daily breaking news. "You lose ownership, but you gain an amazing amount of teamwork," says de Vogue, who is 37 and continues her investigations while raising two young children.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
46. I see what they mean
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 01:22 PM
Jun 2016

they are complimenting her for asking tough questions and that her opinions are in searing language - though the opposite in conclusion, the method they are saying is just as passionate or whatever. Comparisons does not mean identical. There are similarities and differences you can compare between any two people.

malthaussen

(17,066 posts)
47. No.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 01:47 PM
Jun 2016

Should the author of this piece be staked out naked in the desert smeared with honey? Well, to some that is a good idea.

-- Mal

StevieM

(10,499 posts)
50. Sonia Sotomayer is IMO the best justice appointed the court in the last 60 years since Brennan
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 02:09 PM
Jun 2016

was placed on the high court.

Else You Are Mad

(3,040 posts)
51. Well, no.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 02:15 PM
Jun 2016

She wrote a very passionate dissenting opinion to an awful ruling by the SC. If she were like Scalia, she would write a verbose angry dissenting opinion to a just ruling.

Svafa

(594 posts)
52. What a stupid headline. "They're exactly the same, in that they're total opposites!"
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 02:16 PM
Jun 2016

is what the article seems to be saying. Good grief, CNN.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
54. As news professionals know, many people read ONLY headlines. So, CNN's headline is an attempt to
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 02:17 PM
Jun 2016

deceive that portion of the public.

For a first world nation, we sure do have crappy mainstream media.

Response to Renew Deal (Original post)

 

frankieallen

(583 posts)
76. Well, to play devils advocate.
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 09:45 PM
Jun 2016

"This case allows the police to stop you on the street, demand your identification, and check it for outstanding traffic warrants -- even if you are doing nothing wrong,"

If the court decided the opposite, as Sotomayor suggested, that you needed to be somehow breaking the law in order for an officer to ask you to identify yourself, that would be unprecedented IMO.
As i understand the law, if a police officer asks you for your id, or asks you to identify yourself, you must comply. I don't have a problem with that. They are there to protect us and to enforce the laws.
Cops deal with people every day, if they suspect someone is up to no good, they are probably right, and they should have the right to check.
If they are wrong, no harm done.

(full disclosure, my brother is a cop)

bluejaylane

(5 posts)
77. You are incorrect
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 10:39 PM
Jun 2016

A police officer may not require that you identify yourself unless he/she has a legal reason for contacting you. That requirement is called probable cause—that's his/her authority for detaining you. It's his/her defensible belief that you have done something illegal. Cops just don't get to stop people and demand ID. Sadly, you've missed the entire point of the argument Justice Sotomayor made. To restate it, many members of the police are not there to protect us. Some are racists, bigots, and right wing radicals. They might stop people for no reason either to hassle them under color of authority or run a criminal background without cause hoping to arrest them. Theses tactics were once rampant in the South and still common throughout the US today. Suggesting that "if they suspect someone is up to no good, they are probably right" is naive in the extreme.

(full disclosure: I used to be a federal peace officer)

Todays_Illusion

(1,209 posts)
78. I don't think Scalia was a great legal mind so much as he was kind of a Zig Zigler bs master of
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 10:44 PM
Jun 2016

using obfuscating language and strangely constructed and linked sentences.

Renew Deal

(81,802 posts)
81. The general response to this OP is about as odd as it gets
Wed Jun 29, 2016, 11:22 PM
Jun 2016

Pretty much every response is about how terrible the comparison is, but it's got 91 recs. I suspect that people hate the comparison, but love the idea of a left win Scalia.

Response to Renew Deal (Original post)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»CNN: Is Sotomayor the new...