As President Obama's Supreme Court nominee comes under heavy fire for allegedly being a "racist," Judge Sonia Sotomayor is listed as a member of the National Council of La Raza, a group that's promoted driver's licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police.
La Raza claims to be just a Hispanic civil rights organization, but some of their views go beyond just looking out for the rights of Hispanics. They have advocated that some of the states in the Southwest United States should secede from the US.
Over the past two days, Sotomayor has been heavily criticized for her racially charged statement: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
The remark was actually made during a 2001 speech at the University of California's Berkeley School of Law. The lecture was published the following year in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal.
So, according to Sotomayor, a white man could never have experience as "rich" as a latina. Therefore, a white man can't make a decision as well as a latina.
Isn't this same type of logic that whites used against blacks to justify their enslavement and later segregation? They believed that the European culture was superior to the African culture. Therefore, according to white supremacists, blacks can't be as smart as a white person. What is the difference between that logic and Sotomayor's?
This another dangerous position for a judge to hold. If she really believes that Hispanics "reach a better conclusion" than whites, she could subconsciously favor a Hispanic attorney or client that comes before her court over their white counterpart.