I've been reading a lot about Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's answers to questions during her confirmation hearing and one point keeps striking me as a fundamental problem.
She seems to be basing her answers on what the Supreme Court has previously ruled - not on the Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land - not nine individuals in black robes.
In doing this, she fails to reveal her judicial philosophy and her interpretation of the Constitution - which is critical to know when deciding whether or not to appoint or confirm a person to such a position.
My speculation is that this is a planned approach designed to conceal exactly what her judicial philosophy is, or to provide a non-controversial response to difficult questions that might, if answered differently, imperil her confirmation.
It’s a shame that none of the Senators asking her questions have noted this fact and asked her to state her own position - and not just recite what the court has previously done.
After all, that’s what she’ll have to do if she gets confirmed.