Sotomayor—A Quota Queen for the Court

If the U.S.
Senate rejects race-based justice,
Sonia Sotomayor
will never sit on the Supreme Court.


 Because that is
what Sonia is all about. As
The New York Times
reported Saturday, the salient cause of her career has
been

advancing persons of color, over whites
, based on
race and national origin.


 "Judge
Sotomayor, whose parents moved to New York from Puerto
Rico,"
writes reporter David Kirkpatrick,
"has championed
the importance of considering race and ethnicity in
admissions, hiring and even judicial selection at almost
every stage of her career
."(

Sotomayor`s Focus on Race Issues May Be Hurdle
, 
May 29, 2009 
)


 At Princeton, she
headed up

Accion Puertorriquena,
which filed a complaint with
the Department of Health, Education and Welfare
demanding that her school hire Hispanic teachers. At
Yale, she co-chaired a coalition of non-black minorities
of color that demanded more Latino professors and
administrators.

At Yale, she
"shared the alarm of others in the group when the Supreme Court
prohibited the use of quotas in university admissions in
the 1978 decision

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
."


 Alan
Bakke
was an applicant to the UC medical school at
Davis who was rejected, though his test scores were
higher than almost all of the minority students who were
admitted.
Bakke
was white
.


 After Yale,
Sotomayor joined the National Council of La Raza and the
board of

the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund
. Both promote
race and ethnic preferences, affirmative action and
quotas for Hispanics.


 But why should
Puerto Ricans like Sotomayor, who were never subjected
to

slavery
or Jim Crow—their island was liberated from
Spain in 1898 by the United States—get racial or ethnic
preferences over Polish- or Portuguese-Americans?


 What is the
justification for this kind of discrimination?


 Like

Lani Guinier
, the Clinton appointee rejected for
reverse racism, Sonia Sotomayor is a

quota queen.
She believes in, preaches and practices
race-based justice. Her

burying the appeal of the white New Haven firefighters
,
who were denied promotions they had

won in competitive exams,
was a no-brainer for her.


 In her world,
equal justice takes a back seat to tribal justice

Now, people
often come out to vote for one of their own.

Catholics for JFK
,

evangelicals
for Mike Huckabee, women for

Hillary Clinton,
Mormons for Mitt Romney, Jews for
Joe Lieberman and

African-Americans
for

Barack Obama.
That is political reality and an
exercise of political freedom.

But tribal
justice is un-American.

In the 1950s and
1960s, this country reached consensus that denying black
men and women the equal opportunity to advance and
succeed must come to an end. Discrimination based on
race, color or ethnicity, we agreed, was wrong.

Sotomayor,
however, has an exception to the no-discrimination rule.
She believes in no discrimination,

unless done to white males and to benefit people like
her.

How can any
Republican senator vote to elevate to the Supreme Court
a judge who, all her life, has believed in, preached and
practiced race discrimination against white males,
without endorsing the Obama-Sotomayor view that

diversity trumps equal justice
, and race-based
justice should have its own seat on the high court?

Down the path
Sotomayor would take us lies an America where Hispanic
justices rule for Hispanics, black judges rule for
blacks and white judges rule for white folks.

It is an America
where who gets admitted to the

best colleges and universities i
s not decided on
grades and academic excellence, but on race and
ethnicity, where advancement in jobs and careers depends
not on aptitude and ability, but on where your
grandparents came from.

On principle,
Republicans cannot support Sonia Sotomayor.

And politically,
if they do, why should the white working man and woman
ever vote Republican again, as it is they who are the
designated victims of the race-based justice of Sonia
Sotomayor?

It was Richard
Nixon who brought the white working class, North and
South, into his New Majority, when he increased the
Republican presidential vote from 43 percent in 1968 to
61 percent in 1972. Ronald Reagan solidified this base.

But why should
the white working and middle class stay with the GOP?
Its presidents exported their jobs to Mexico, China and
Asia, and threw open America`s doors to tens of
millions, legal and illegal, from the Third World, who
have swamped their cities and towns. If the GOP will not
end race-based affirmative action, which threatens the
futures of their children, why vote for the GOP?

Why should white
folks vote for anyone who says, "We are against race
discrimination, unless it is discrimination against
you"?

Obama would not
have selected Sotomayor if he did not share her
convictions. And there is nothing in his writings or
career to hint at disagreement. Thus it comes down to
the senators, especially the Republicans. A vote for
Sonia Sotomayor is a vote to affirm that race-based
justice deserves its own seat on the U.S. Supreme Court.

But if that
happens, it will

not only
be the
race consciousness of Hispanics
that will be on the
rise in the good old U.S.A.

COPYRIGHT

CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC
.



Patrick J. Buchanan

needs

no introduction
to VDARE.COM readers;
his book
 
State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, can be ordered from Amazon.com. His latest book
is Churchill,
Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost Its
Empire and the West Lost the World,

reviewed

here
by

Paul Craig Roberts.