Now that we’ve had some time to hear her statements and responses, we can safely surmise that she is being deceptive.

She tried to make excuses for her “wise Latina ” comment and downplay it. Just ask the simple question of whether or not a white male could have made a similar comment and got away with it. If the answer is no, then she is wrong - period. If a male judge said something about a “wise white man” coming to better decisions, he would never be given a free pass, and neither should Sotomayor.

Sotomayor now claims she will be impartial on the bench, in direct contradiction to her previous statements, so why should we believe her? Her words during the hearings mean very little if they contradict her past; of course she is saying whatever she needs to say to be confirmed. Her past actions and statements will be the true guide as to what to expect from her as a Supreme Court justice. She has been supportive of the idea of policy-making from the bench; she does not believe in impartiality; she does not respect proper judicial procedure; she believes that ‘empathy’ can be used instead of law; she has made repeated racialist comments; she believes that statutes restricting possession of weapons do not even implicate fundamental rights; she does not respect American sovereignty by incorporating foreign laws into rulings.

Sotomayor calls the Constitution a “timeless” document, implying unchanging, although she has no problem with radical interpretations that drastically change historical understandings (i.e. Second Amendment), or creates new rights out of thin air (i.e. abortion). She calls abortion “settled” law, although actual enumerated amendments can be infringed upon without concern. So much for being timeless.

So far she has been evasive while trying to re-make herself as someone other than what her history shows. If this ruse works, it will be to the detriment of the American people.