By Jennifer Parker

Mar 13, 2009 5:11pm

Is Sotomayor a Lock for the Supreme Court?

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg raised a few eyebrows today with her prediction that
President Barack Obama would "surely" pick a Supreme Court justice "soon." 

Here’s my question: what are the chances that Obama DOESN’T pick Sonia Sotomayor? 

In her favor, she was appointed to the federal bench by George H.W. Bush. Elevated to the Appeals Court by Bill Clinton. She’s a protégé of Daniel Patrick Moynihan and a prosecutor with Robert Morgenthau.  Graduate of Princeton and Yale after growing up in the South Bronx. 

And, Sotomayor would be the first Hispanic Justice on the Supreme Court bench.

1-10 she gets the nod.  Too high?  Too low?

–George Stephanopoulos

User Comments

What’s the matter ABC? Hussein get mad at you and make you yank your story about his falling popularity? We all know he’s sinking!

Posted by: bo | March 13, 2009, 5:15 pm 5:15 pm

It happens to every president. The first 60 days or so everyone is hoping for the best, but eventually politics take hold and we are usually slightly dismayed at whoever the president is at the time. Nothing new here.

Posted by: eyeonyou | March 13, 2009, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

What has this story to do with the presidents poll numbers?

Posted by: vnvet69 | March 13, 2009, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

George. How dare you. This is not true and full of rotten fabricated lies.

Posted by: tuss | March 13, 2009, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

First, I had gone to a page that did not exist and now we get some substitute story on a possible future Supreme Court Nominee. Lol!
Our local ABC affiliate has an online poll “Do you agree with how Obama is handling the economic crisis?” It’s running about 77% on the NO side. This was probably about the same.

Posted by: Melanie | March 13, 2009, 5:21 pm 5:21 pm

You got it Bo. I was surprised that they were actually going to admit that people are upset with the ‘Golden One.’ Nope! The media is so firmly entrenched with the liberals. It is pathetic. Not that I was a big fan of Bush, but if he had been doing the things Obama is doing, they would have crucified him.

Posted by: Colin | March 13, 2009, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm

bo—his popularity is higher than Reagan’s was this far into his administration. and what this has to do with the topic i have no idea. you make your racism clear by calling him “Hussein” to infer he is un-american. but you go bo! hate is the name of your game.

Posted by: Paul Wall | March 13, 2009, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm

Melanie—your “ABC affiliate” is local. you may live in a republican “red” area. a local poll is not a national poll. just yesterday Obama’s approval was at 61%, higher than Reagan at the same time in his presidency. don’t think your “ABC” affiliate’s” poll is a national.

Posted by: Paul Wall | March 13, 2009, 5:30 pm 5:30 pm

Actually, Obama’s approval rating is at 62%, so the vast majority of Americans approve of the job he is doing. Only 27% disapprove of the job he is doing. I’d presume those are the same people who actually thought Bush was doing a good job, so no one really takes their opinion seriously. Furthermore, according to Gallop, on March 11, Congress’ approval rating was the highest in 4 years “due largely to higher ratings from Democrats”.

Posted by: StatingtheFacts | March 13, 2009, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm

StatingtheFacts—thanks. the right-wingers only know what Limbaugh tells them to believe. and that’s never the facts.

Posted by: Paul Wall | March 13, 2009, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm

George, i think 1-10 is too high. i think Sotomayor is an excellent and obvious choice. i guess Justice Ginsburg’s comments imply someone will be retiring?

Posted by: Paul Wall | March 13, 2009, 5:42 pm 5:42 pm

Wow Colin! That part about the media being “so firmly entrenched with the liberals” was cold! The fact is if Bushie had been doing the things Obama is doing now, this mess wouldn’t be as bad as it is! You negative people would like nothing better to see Obama fail. Sounds like you traded Bushie for Rushie!

Posted by: js45601 | March 13, 2009, 5:44 pm 5:44 pm

js45601—yeah the radical right likes names ending with “ush”…Rush, Bush, anything you can flush.

Posted by: Paul Wall | March 13, 2009, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm

Colin—you know very well Obama will never do anything as bad as Bush.

Posted by: Paul Wall | March 13, 2009, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm

Wow, what a great pick. Smart, a woman, vetted by R’s and D’s, Hispanic. A shoo in if you ask me!

Posted by: PixieGirl | March 13, 2009, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm

Remember when people were judged by the content of their character and job performance and NOT discriminated on the basis of race, gender or ethnicity… Then what happens, we discriminate on the basis of those same factors. A insert race here, for a insert race here; a gender for a gender; Maybe if we had the best scholarly constitutional minds on the court, instead of political idealogues, the Court would make reasonable decisions that would follow the law instead of reinterpret it, to the whim of the majority political opinions, instead of what the bill of rights and constitution actually state in writing…

Posted by: hmn... | March 13, 2009, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm

Ha! Good ones, Paul!

Posted by: js45601 | March 13, 2009, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm

Colin, you complain that the media hates conservatives, but seriously, why should the media or anyone else like them? In 8 years of power you turned a great country into social excrement with your ignorant, redneck, obstructionist, “Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition” ways and you expect anyone, media included, to like you? And now when you’re finally presented with a chance to prove you’re not what we think you are, you actually turn your backward ways up a notch! Your leader/demigod Rush Limbaugh openly wishes failure for Obama, not a single one of your House members votes for the stimulus plan, and now your party’s governors are saying they’ll refuse stimulus money their people desperately need. And you wonder why the media hates you!
I used to be a conservative back when it meant standing for small government, less intrusion into people’s lives, fewer taxes, and greater emphasis on individual accountability. George Bush and the Republican Congress that followed him lock-in-step changed all that, as well as people’s perceptions of both conservatives and Republicans. Now you are the opposite: you gladly intrude on the lives of both Americans and foreigners with illegal wiretapping and overzealous wars fought for unjust reasons, you love big government and you spend, spend, spend, you hold no one accountable (please, if you think Libby, Goodling and Gonzales are the only members of the Bush administration that deserve criminal punishment, then “accountability” is just a 4-letter word to you), and you want to force religion and religious morality on everyone. But hey, at least you still cut taxes, even though it causes extreme deficits due to your over-spending ways. Now tell me again, why are you surprised the media hates conservatives and Republicans?

Posted by: Paulie Vegas | March 13, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm

I think that she will be the next Supreme Court Justice. I wonder who will step down. Is Souter next to step down?

Posted by: Stacey | March 13, 2009, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm

What Presidents popularity numbers didnt fall after the first 30-60 days?
Obama still has a 60+ approval rating and it will be more interesting to see where his approval rating are then. Since the Republicans seem more interested in bashing Obama than fixing their own “Ship without a rudder” Republican party they can only hope that the economy doesnt turn around or Obama make right decisions as that would cinch his 2012 2nd term. I think that is why Savage, Rush and Hannidy are on nerve ends.
For years the Republican party have lost touch and now focus on the hope Obama fails. They listen to Rush and Hannidy which are the very examples of what is wrong with the “Grand Ole Party.” Just look at its recent campaine and past. The Republican Party shamelessly abandoned its values. Not only did Republicans disavow their leader (George W. Bush), they pressured presidential candidate John McCain into supporting far-right positions he had previously opposed, thereby destroying his political integrity. Meanwhile, the win-at-all-costs mentality of Republican strategists led to the adoption of an overridingly negative and cynical campaign strategy—one that attempted to demonize Barack Obama by portraying him as a terrorist and someone without a U.S. birth certificate. Even more shameful is that McCain and his campaign (with a handful of exceptions) tacitly endorsed calls for violence against Obama by failing to discourage rally goers who shouted “off with his head” and the like. However, the most irresponsible decision of the year was McCain’s choice of running mate, Sarah Palin, who was painfully unqualified and neither the reformer nor maverick she purported to be. From her very first public appearance it was clear the self-proclaimed “hockey mom” was in over her head, and although handlers bent over backwards to hide her intellectual shortcomings from the American people, she was ultimately exposed as being totally unprepared to be vice-president. Before pointing your fingers at Obama or anyone else, try looking at yourself and what you need to do.

Posted by: CAW | March 13, 2009, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm

What’s the matter ABC? Hussein get mad at you and make you yank your story about his falling popularity? We all know he’s sinking!
Posted by: bo
*************************************
Poor bo, felt a drop of water and now thinks the sky is falling. If anyone even thinks of taking you seriously, you need to sit back and look at the nose-diving
Pres. Obama’s predecessor had during his terms.

Posted by: spacerook1 | March 13, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

What’s the matter ABC? Hussein get mad at you and make you yank your story about his falling popularity? We all know he’s sinking!
Posted by: bo
*************************************
Poor bo, felt a drop of water and now thinks the sky is falling. If anyone even thinks of taking you seriously, you need to sit back and look at the nose-diving
Pres. Obama’s predecessor had during his terms.

Posted by: spacerook1 | March 13, 2009, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

BO, by “we” do you mean the 26% of Americans who disapprove of him…presumably the same 26% who for some God-knows-what reason still thought their boy Bushie was doing a good job to the very last day.

Posted by: Just Wondering | March 13, 2009, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm

but…..can she speak English????

Posted by: Timray | March 13, 2009, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

All the right wing things about is abortion and wedge issues not real issues. They won’t win elections on that any more.

Posted by: jesse | March 13, 2009, 7:50 pm 7:50 pm

“…the first Hispanic justice” for the Supreme Court –
WHY choose on RACE?
If it’s WRONG not to hire someone because of their race, it’s DEAD WRONG to hire someone based on their race.
But…that’s politics…dirty politics…what a “change” — LOL
ONLY the JOKE is on US

Posted by: That's Bad | March 13, 2009, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm

Kim Wardlaw also has the liberal/gender/ethic criteria that Sotomaier brings to the table.
I think the second opening (Stevens/Ginsburg) goes to Kagan.

Posted by: arvid | March 13, 2009, 9:56 pm 9:56 pm

I am not sure how locked in she is. Obama knows more about jurisprudence than any other modern president (Bill Clinton included).
Therefore, he knows that Sotomayer is a moderate in a time when liberal voices are just barely hanging on on the court. I think he wants stronger voices for the left, and I would look out for Kagan, Kathleen Sullivan (the first gay Justice), and Cass Sunstein. Also would look out for a dark knight.

Posted by: Ben | March 13, 2009, 10:33 pm 10:33 pm

Timray—”but…..can she speak English????”, stupid racist trash. go back to Rush.

Posted by: Paul Wall | March 13, 2009, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm

So who will he be replacing on the Court? Was Ginsberg anticipating her own demise? Or was she suggesting Obama should start to pack the Court?
Did Sottomayor pay her nanny’s taxes? Smoke dope in the south bronx in her youth? Go out with some seedy newyorker 25 years ago?
What wouldn’t they go after?

Posted by: Euglenia | March 13, 2009, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm

This is change??? More of the same as with Bush, only under a different umbrella. His gig were judges who believe that the Constitution stopped breathing the day after it was finally adopted by the states. Obama’s is who shall be the “first” whatever. This Balkanization of America under the guise of diversity will be an endless nightmare and the country’s undoing. When, for example, will be get the first Slovakian Supreme Court Justice? It should be the best qualified, not the best labelled!!!

Posted by: 5unbelievable5 | May 1, 2009, 10:47 am 10:47 am

Sonia Sotomayors family is from Puerto Rico, the’ve been US Citizens for over 100 Years. A lot longer then many of the idiots her questioning her qualifications because she’s hispanic.

Posted by: BushSucked | May 1, 2009, 11:40 am 11:40 am

I have nothing against Judge Sotomayor, but I have yet to hear a compelling case for her on intellectual grounds. What serious published work has she done that shows she thinks deeply about the Constitution and other aspects of American law (and yes, there are other aspects). Which significant decisions from the bench are noteworthy? (Is the MLB decision the best one can muster?)
Now none of this is fair. Scholarly performance and judicial influence have rarely counted for much in Supreme Court appointments. Souter himself certainly did not have a distinguished record of legal scholarship. In fact, the only two members of the current court who are really deep are at the antipodes: Scalia and Stevens. All the rest are politicians of one sort or another.

Posted by: W Madden | May 1, 2009, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.