The Judicial Network has found some glaring omissions in Sonia Sotomayor’s Senate questionnaire for her Supreme Court nomination:
The questionnaire submitted yesterday fails to disclose and produce at least one very significant document required under the terms of Question 12(b), which requires Judge Sotomayor to “[s]upply four (4) copies of any reports, memoranda, or policy statements you prepared or contributed to the preparation of on behalf of any bar association, committee, conference, or organization of which you were or are a member or in which you have participated.”
Judge Sotomayor discloses elsewhere in the memo that from 1980 to 1992 she was a member of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense & Education Fund (PRLDEF), serving in a number of high-ranking positions for the organization. Despite more than a decade of work for the organization, however, she has failed to disclose the sort of documents requested by the questionnaire documents that would give the Senate and the American public a better picture of who Judge Sotomayor is and how she has used her career to advance certain agendas.
Sotomayor lists on her Senate questionnaire a PRLDEF letter to then-Governor Hugh Carey, “opposing reinstatement of the death penalty,” dated April 10, 1981. But she fails to list, and does not supply a copy of, a significant policy “Memorandum” that she signed on behalf of the PRLDEF “Task Force on the Bill to Restore the Death Penalty in New York State,” dated March 24, 1981.
All three members of the task force, including Sotomayor, signed the Memorandum, urging the Board of PRLDEF to “take a public position in opposition to the restoration of the Death Penalty in New York State.”
The memo signed by Sotomayor makes a number of controversial, unsupported, and badly reasoned assertions about the death penalty, including:
- “Capital punishment is associated with evident racism in our society.”
- “In the review of the current literature of the past two years, no publications have been found that challenge the evidence and the rationale presented in opposition to the death penalty.”
- “The problem of crime and violence in American society is so complex, it is unreasonable to think that capital punishment will result in preventing it or diminishing it.”
- “Our present perspective on the meaning of our values in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and the state of humanistic thinking in the world judge capital punishment as a violation of those values.”
- “It is counter-productive; we inflict death on the offender to manifest our opposition to his inflicting death on another.”
Just reading that list of quotes is scary. There were obviously a multitude of publications with rationales supporting the death penalty; to say there weren’t is simply a lie. Capital Punishment obviously diminishes crime and violence in society, as has been demonstarated time and time again with the “Three Strikes” law.
And if these opinions of Judge Sotomyor’s were simply “youthful indiscretions”, why not just say so in the hearings upcoming? This looks more like an intentional attempt to hide — which, given the Obama Administration’s record, is . . . uh, questionable, to say the least.