Sonia Sotomayor

From Ballotpedia
Sonia Sotomayor
Image of Sonia Sotomayor

Nonpartisan

Supreme Court of the United States

Tenure

2009 - Present

Years in position

12

Prior offices
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit

Education

Bachelor's

Princeton University, 1976

Law

Yale Law School, 1979

Contents

  • 1 Professional career
  • 2 Early life and education
  • 3 Approach to the law
    • 3.1 Martin-Quinn score
    • 3.2 Video discussion
  • 4 Judicial career
    • 4.1 United States Supreme Court (2009 - present)
    • 4.2 Second Circuit Court of Appeals (1998-2009)
    • 4.3 Southern District of New York (1992-1998)
  • 5 Supreme Court statistics
    • 5.1 Opinions by year
    • 5.2 Justice agreement
    • 5.3 Frequency in majority
  • 6 Noteworthy cases
    • 6.1 Supreme court cases
      • 6.1.1 Scope of judicial review in administrative agencies' actions (2020)
      • 6.1.2 Tribal hunting treaties (2018)
    • 6.2 Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
    • 6.3 Second Circuit cases
    • 6.4 Ricci v. DeStefano (2008)
    • 6.5 Riverkeeper Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2007)
    • 6.6 Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush (2002)
    • 6.7 Malesko v. Correctional Services Corporation (2000)
    • 6.8 District court cases
    • 6.9 Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group (1998)
    • 6.10 Tasini v. New York Times, et al (1997)
    • 6.11 Silverman v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Committee, Inc. (1995)
    • 6.12 Dow Jones v. U.S. Department of Justice (1995)
  • 7 Recent news
  • 8 See also
  • 9 External links
  • 10 Footnotes


Sonia Sotomayor is an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. She was nominated by President Barack Obama (D) to fill the seat left vacant by David Souter on June 1, 2009. She was confirmed by the Senate on August 6 and sworn in on August 8, 2009, becoming the first Hispanic justice to sit on the Court.

Sotomayor began her legal career as an assistant district attorney in Manhattan. She moved into private practice at Pavia & Harcourt, where she specialized in intellectual property rights and copyright litigation.[1]

She was nominated to serve on the District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H.W. Bush (R) in 1991 and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit by President Bill Clinton (D) In 1997.

Sotomayor’s notable opinions include her dissent in preferential admissions case Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action and the majority opinion in abortion case Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush.

Professional career[edit]

Early life and education[edit]

Sotomayor was born on June 25, 1954, in New York, New York. Her parents were born in Puerto Rico.[3][4][5] Sotomayor graduated as valedictorian from Cardinal Spellman High School, a private Catholic school in New York City, in 1972. At the time of her confirmation, Sotomayor was the sixth sitting Catholic on the court, alongside Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito.[6][7][8]

Sotomayor graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University with an undergraduate degree in history in 1976. While at Princeton, she received the M. Taylor Pyne Honor Prize. Sotomayor wrote her senior thesis on "The Impact of the Life of Luis Muñoz Marin on the Political and Economic History of Puerto Rico, 1930-1975." After graduating from Princeton University, Sotomayor attended Yale Law School, where she received her J.D. in 1979. She co-chaired the Latin American and Native American Students Association and was published in the Yale Law Journal (where she served as an editor) with the note "Statehood and the Equal Footing Doctrine: The Case for Puerto Rican Seabed Rights," which, as the title suggests, analyzed issues regarding Puerto Rico's ability to maintain rights to its seabed if it pursued statehood.[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][3]

Approach to the law[edit]

Sotomayor is known to be a member of the court's liberal bloc. Recapping her first ten years on the court, Richard Wolf wrote in USA Today in 2019 that "she has been a reliable member of the court's liberal wing."[16]

Oyez, a law project created by Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, Justia, and Chicago-Kent College of Law, said in 2019 that Sotomayor "is known on the court for her trust in the judicial process, and her cutthroat attitude toward ill-prepared attorneys. She is also known for her kindness toward jurors and the attorneys who work hard to advocate for their clients."[1]

Martin-Quinn score[edit]

Sotomayor's Martin-Quinn score following the 2020-2021 term was -3.96, making her the most liberal justice on the court at that time. Martin-Quinn scores were developed by political scientists Andrew Martin and Kevin Quinn from the University of Michigan, and measure the justices of the Supreme Court along an ideological continuum. The further from zero on the scale, the more conservative (>0) or liberal (<0) the justice. The chart below details every justice's Martin-Quinn score for the 2020-2021 term.

Video discussion[edit]

Sotomayor spoke at the Library of Congress in February 2018 about her work as a children's author, differences in her work at different levels of federal courts, and how rulings of the court impact future cases. The video of that event is embedded below.

Judicial career[edit]

United States Supreme Court (2009 - present)[edit]

Nomination Tracker
Fedbadgesmall.png
Nominee Information
Name: Sonia Sotomayor
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Progress
Confirmed 66 days after nomination.
ApprovedANominated: June 1, 2009
ApprovedAABA Rating: Unanimously Well Qualified
ApprovedAHearing: January 9-13, 2006
ApprovedAHearing Transcript: Hearing Transcript
DefeatedAQuestionnaire:
ApprovedAHearing: January 9-13, 2006
DefeatedAQFRs: (Hover over QFRs to read more)
ApprovedAReported: July 28, 2009 
ApprovedAConfirmed: August 6, 2009
ApprovedAVote: 68-31

On May 26, 2009, President Barack Obama (D) nominated Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States to fill the seat of Justice David Souter. The Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of her confirmation on July 28, 2009, in a 13-6 vote with one Republican, Senator Lindsey Graham, voting in favor. Sotomayor was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on August 6, 2009, on a vote of 68-31.[17][18][19][20][21]

Sotomayor became the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice with her confirmation on August 6, 2009. She was the third woman to serve on the nation's highest court at the time of her confirmation.[17][22]

At the time of Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, Democrats had enough votes to circumvent any Republican attempts to block her confirmation.[23][24]

Second Circuit Court of Appeals (1998-2009)[edit]

Sotomayor served as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit from 1998 until her confirmation as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States in 2009.

On the recommendation of U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D), Sotomayor was nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit by President Bill Clinton (D) on June 25, 1997, to a seat vacated by Daniel Mahoney. Sotomayor was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on October 2, 1998, on a 67-29-2 vote, receiving her commission on October 7, 1998.[25][26]

A substantial majority of judicial evaluators at the American Bar Association ranked Sotomayor in 1997 as "well qualified" for a position on the federal appellate bench, while a minority of evaluators found her "qualified."[27]

In filling out her Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire, Sotomayor wrote that "judges must be extraordinarily sensitive to the impact of their decisions and function within, and respectful of, the Constitution."[28]

For Sotomayor's confirmation materials from 1998, visit the Sotomayor Collection at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library at this link.

Southern District of New York (1992-1998)[edit]

Sotomayor's appointment was held up for nearly a year under an anonymous hold, despite approval by the Senate Judiciary Committee and a Unanimously Qualified rating by the American Bar Association. Sotomayor was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on August 11, 1992, by unanimous consent, receiving her commission on August 12, 1992. When she joined the court, she was its youngest judge.[29][30][31]

Supreme Court statistics[edit]

Opinions by year[edit]

Below is a table of the number of opinions, concurrences, and dissents that Sotomayor has issued since joining the Supreme Court according to the data on Cornell University’s Legal Information Institute and the website SCOTUSblog. This information is updated annually at the end of each term.[32][33][34]

Opinions written by year, Sonia Sotomayor
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Opinions 8 7 6 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 5 6
Concurrences 3 9 7 3 6 3 3 4 7 3 9 7
Dissents 4 6 6 5 5 6 5 4 9 9 8 9
Totals 15 22 19 16 19 16 15 15 23 19 22 22

Justice agreement[edit]

In the 2020 term, Sotomayor had the highest agreement rate with Stephen Breyer. Sotomayor had the highest disagreement rate with Samuel Alito.[35] In the 2018 and 2019 terms, Sotomayor agreed in full, part, or judgment only the most often with Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She disagreed most often with Clarence Thomas.[36][37] The table below highlights Sotomayor's agreement and disagreement rates with each justice on the court during that term.

Sonia Sotomayor agreement rates, 2017 - Present
2017 term 2018 term 2019 term 2020 term
Justice Agreement rate Disagreement rate Agreement rate Disagreement rate Agreement rate Disagreement rate Agreement rate[38] Disagreement rate
John Roberts 66% 34% 65% 35% 69% 31% 66% 34%
Anthony Kennedy 65% 35% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Clarence Thomas 51% 19% 50% 50% 44% 56% 55% 45%
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 96% 4% 93% 7% 89% 11% N/A N/A
Stephen Breyer 90% 10% 85% 15% 85% 15% 93% 7%
Samuel Alito 49% 51% 57% 43% 46% 54% 53% 47%
Elena Kagan 91% 9% 88% 12% 88% 12% 88% 12%
Neil Gorsuch 55% 45% 63% 37% 64% 36% 58% 42%
Brett Kavanaugh N/A N/A 64% 36% 65% 35% 66% 34%
Amy Coney Barrett N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 58% 42%

Frequency in majority[edit]

In the 2020 term, Sotomayor was in the majority in 69 percent of decisions. Sotomayor was in the majority the least often of the nine justices.[39] In the 2019 term, Sotomayor was in the majority in 72 percent of decisions, the least often along with Clarence Thomas.[40]

Since the 2011 term, Sotomayor has been in the majority more than 80 percent of the time five times. Across those 10 terms, she has been in the majority for 79 percent of all cases.[41]

Noteworthy cases[edit]

See also: Noteworthy cases heard by current justices on the U.S. Supreme Court

The noteworthy cases listed in this section include any case where the justice authored a 5-4 majority opinion or an 8-1 dissent. Other cases may be included in this decision if they set or overturn an established legal precedent, are a major point of discussion in an election campaign, receive substantial media attention related to the justice's ruling, or based on our editorial judgment that the case is noteworthy. For more on how we decide which cases are noteworthy, click here.


Since she joined the court through the 2020 term, Sotomayor authored the majority opinion in a 5-4 decision eight times and authored a dissent in an 8-1 decision 14 times. The table below details these cases by year.[42]

Sonia Sotomayor noteworthy cases
Year 5-4 majority opinion 8-1 dissenting opinion
Total 8 14
2020 1 4
2019 0 1
2018 1 0
2017 0 0
2016 0 2
2015 0 2
2014 2 2
2013 0 1
2012 1 0
2011 2 2
2010 1 0
2009 0 0

Supreme court cases[edit]

Scope of judicial review in administrative agencies' actions (2020)[edit]

See also: Salinas v. United States Railroad Retirement Board

Justice Sotomayor authored a 5-4 majority opinion in Salinas v. United States Railroad Retirement Board, holding that the Board’s refusal to reopen a prior benefits determination is subject to judicial review. Justice Sotomayor was joined in the majority by Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Brett Kavanaugh.[43]

“ It is also worth noting that judicial review of reopening decisions will be limited. The Board’s decision to grant or deny reopening, while guided by substantive criteria, is ultimately discretionary and therefore subject to reversal only for abuse of discretion. See 20 CFR §261.11; Stovic, 826 F. 3d, at 506; Szostak v. Railroad Retirement Bd., 370 F. 2d 253, 254 (CA2 1966) (Friendly, J., for the court). Most decisions will be upheld under this deferential standard. See ICC v. Locomotive Engineers, 482 U. S. 270, 288 (1987) (Stevens, J., concurring). Judicial review plays a modest, but important, role in guarding against decisions that are arbitrary, inconsistent with the standards set by the Board's own regulations, or otherwise contrary to law.[44] ”
—Justice Sotomayor

Tribal hunting treaties (2018)[edit]

See also: Herrera v. Wyoming

Sotomayor authored a 5-4 majority opinion in this case holding that the Crow Tribe's hunting rights under an 1868 treaty did not expire upon Wyoming's statehood. Sotomayor was joined in the majority by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Gorsuch. Sotomayor wrote:[45]

“ The Wyoming courts held that the treaty-protected hunting right expired when Wyoming became a State and, in any event, does not permit hunting in Bighorn National Forest because that land is not "unoccupied." We disagree. The Crow Tribe’s hunting right survived Wyoming’s statehood, and the lands within Bighorn National Forest did not become categorically "occupied" when set aside as a national reserve. [44] ”

Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action
See also: Supreme Court of the United States (Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, 572 U.S. ___ (2014))

Justice Sotomayor wrote the dissent in a 7-2 decision to uphold a Michigan constitutional amendment to ban any preferential selection based on sex or race, also known as affirmative action. The amendment was challenged by the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary (BAMN) and the defendant listed was Bill Schuette (R), attorney general of Michigan.

Justice Sotomayor wrote:

“ The effect of §26 is that a white graduate of a public Michigan university who whishes to pass his historical privilege on to his children may freely lobby the board of that university in favor of an expanded legacy admissions policy, whereas a black Michagander who was denied the opportunity to attend that very university cannot lobby the board in favor of a policy that might give his children a chance that he never had and that they might never have absent that policy.[46][44] ”

Sotomayor went on to agree with the majority that Michigan did nothing wrong in following the political process to offer an amendment, but wrote that the issue lies in the amendment itself. She wrote that the amendment takes away the ability of university board members to create admission standards that aid minorities but allows ones that aid athletes and legacies, effectively creating uneven admission standards.[46]

Second Circuit cases[edit]

During more than a decade as a circuit court judge, Sotomayor heard appeals on more than 3,000 cases and wrote in excess of 380 opinions for the majority. She had five of those decisions reviewed by the United States Supreme Court, with three of them overturned and two upheld. A survey by University of Texas at Austin law professor Stefanie Lindquist found her judgeship to have been moderate with respect to political leanings. Lindquist studied her 226 majority opinions from 2001 to 2009 and found that 38 percent of her opinions could be clearly defined as liberal, while 49 percent of them fell clearly on the conservative end of the spectrum. She tended to be more conservative in criminal cases, where Supreme Court precedent encourages appellate judges to be pro-prosecution. On civil rights issues such as race, gender, and immigration, on the other hand, Lindquist's study found that Sotomayor tended to be more liberal.[28][47][48]

Ricci v. DeStefano (2008)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit (Ricci v. DeStefano, 530 F.3d 87 (2008))

Sotomayor joined a finding in favor of the city of New Haven rejecting a lawsuit filed by 17 white firefighters and one Hispanic firefighter claiming race discrimination by the city. New Haven denied promotions following a promotion examination that yielded no black candidates eligible for advancement. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the decision, stating the decision to cancel the promotions violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as well as Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which guarantees equal employment opportunity. The court found that Sotomayor's ruling would allow the city to "experiment" with tests until they found one that produced "a more desirable racial distribution."[49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57]

Riverkeeper Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2007)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit (Riverkeeper Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 475 F3d 83 (2007))

Sotomayor found in favor of environmental group Riverkeeper, which challenged an EPA ruling on the Clean Water Act's "best technology" rule involving power plants' need to intake water as weighed against the risk to aquatic life in surrounding waters. In her ruling, she held: "Congress has already specified the relationship between cost and benefits in requiring that the technology designated by EPA be the best available." Sotomayor's decision was overturned by the United States Supreme Court in a 6-3 vote where the court held that EPA could not weigh the costs of changes to power plants versus the value of organisms in dollar terms, but could consider only what costs "may reasonably be borne" by power plants when determining the best technology rule available.[49][58][59]

Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush (2002)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit (Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush, 304 F3d 183 (2002))

In a case involving the Mexico City Policy—announced by President Ronald Reagan (R) in 1984, subsequently rescinded by President Bill Clinton (D), and reauthorized by President George W. Bush (R)—Sotomayor found that the federal government is within its rights to deny federal aid to foreign organizations that support or perform abortions. She dismissed claims by the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy that the Mexico City Policy violated the First Amendment right to association as well as Fifth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection. In her finding, Sotomayor cited the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which authorizes the president "to furnish assistance, on such terms and conditions as he may determine, for voluntary population planning," as well as multiple Supreme Court precedents. In her decision, Sotomayor wrote, "The Supreme Court has made clear that the government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position, and can do so with public funds."[3][60][61]

Malesko v. Correctional Services Corporation (2000)
See also: United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit (Malesko v. Correctional Services Corporation, 229 F3d 374 (2000))

In this case, Sotomayor found that an inmate living in a halfway house could sue a government contractor for forcing him to climb five flights of stairs despite a heart condition after the inmate suffered a heart attack, fell down the stairs, and injured himself. Sotomayor held "extending Bivens liability to reach private corporations furthers [its] overriding purpose: providing redress for violations of constitutional rights." (Bivens was a 1971 Supreme Court case that allowed some people whose rights have been violated by federal agents to sue.) The Supreme Court overturned Sotomayor's decision in a 5 to 4 ruling, stating that only individual agents, not corporations, could be sued for such violations.[49][58][62]

District court cases[edit]

Sotomayor wrote several high-profile rulings regarding the Major League Baseball strike of 1994, the Wall Street Journal's publishing of the suicide note left by former Clinton White House counsel Vince Foster, and copyright issues related to a trivia book about the television show Seinfeld. As a federal district judge, Sotomayor had one of her decisions overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group (1998)
See also: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, 150 F.3d 132 (1998))

Judge Sotomayor ruled (and her ruling was upheld on appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit) that SAT: The Seinfeld Aptitude Test infringed on the copyright of the television show Seinfeld. The case is often used in law schools as a modern application of the fair use doctrine.[63][64]

Tasini v. New York Times, et al (1997)
See also: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Tasini v. New York Times, et al, 972 F. Supp 804 (1997))

Sotomayor ruled in favor of The New York Times when it was sued by freelance journalists claiming the newspaper did not have the right to include their work in the electronic archival database LexisNexis. Sotomayor's decision was reversed by the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit and that reversal was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in a 7-2 vote (Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer dissenting).[65][66][67]

Silverman v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Committee, Inc. (1995)
See also: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Silverman v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Committee, Inc, 67 F3d 1054 (1995))

Judge Sotomayor's decision to grant a temporary injunction against the Major League Baseball owners on March 31, 1995, ended the 232-day baseball strike of 1994. The injunction prevented the owners from installing replacement players and temporarily reinstated a five-year-old collective bargaining agreement allowing the 1995 season to take place and allowing players and owners to come to a new agreement nearly a year later. Her decision was later upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.[65][68][69][70][71][72]

Dow Jones v. U.S. Department of Justice (1995)
See also: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Dow Jones v. U.S. Department of Justice, 880F. Supp. 145 (1995))

In 1995, Judge Sotomayor ruled in favor of the Wall Street Journal, allowing the newspaper to print a photocopy of the final note written by Clinton White House deputy counsel Vince Foster, who died in 1993. Sotomayor ruled that the public interest in the Foster story outweighed any violation of his family's privacy.[73][74][75]

Recent news[edit]

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Sonia Sotomayor - Google News

See also[edit]

External links[edit]


Footnotes[edit]

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Oyez, "Sonia Sotomayor," accessed February 1, 2019
  2. ↑ Federal Judicial Center, "Sonia Sotomayor," accessed April 14, 2021
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Time, "Sonia Sotomayor: A justice like no other," May 28, 2009 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Time_Nomination" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Time_Nomination" defined multiple times with different content
  4. ↑ New York Times, "In Puerto Rico, Supreme Court pick with island roots becomes a superstar," May 29, 2009
  5. ↑ New York Times, "A breakthrough judge: what she always wanted," September 25, 1992
  6. ↑ Cardinal Spellman High School, "Spellman grad U.S. Supreme Court nominee"
  7. ↑ Boston.com, "Sotomayor would be sixth Catholic justice," May 26, 2009, archived January 17, 2013
  8. ↑ Adherents.com, "Religious affiliation of the U.S. Supreme Court"
  9. ↑ Politico, "Princeton University holds the key to understanding Sonia Sotomayor," May 29, 2009
  10. ↑ The Daily Princetonian, "Latin student groups assail university hiring performance," April 22, 1974
  11. ↑ Princeton University, "Princeton alumna, trustee nominated to Supreme Court," May 26, 2009
  12. ↑ Preface to Sonia Sotomayor's Princeton University Senior Thesis: "The Impact of the Life of Luis Muñoz Marin on the Political and Economic History of Puerto Rico, 1930-1975."
  13. ↑ Federal Judicial Center, "Sotomayor, Sonia"
  14. ↑ Yale Law Journal, Sonia Sotomayor's note," May 27, 2009
  15. ↑ Yale Law Journal, "Sonia Sotomayor's Yale Law Journal note 'Statehood and the Equal Footing Doctrine: The Case for Puerto Rican Seabed Rights,'" April 1979
  16. ↑ USA Today, "'The People's Justice': After decade on Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor is most outspoken on bench and off," August 8, 2019
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Washington Post, "Sotomyaor wins confirmation," August 7, 2009 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "WashPost_Vote" defined multiple times with different content
  18. ↑ New York Times, "Senate panel endorses Sotomayor in 13-6 vote," July 28, 2009
  19. ↑ New York Times "Souter said to be leaving court in June," April 30, 2009
  20. ↑ The Unz Review, "Obama's choices: Gird your loins," May 1, 2009
  21. ↑ Chicago Tribune, "Contrasts with court transcend ethnicity," August 7, 2009
  22. ↑ Time, "Sonia Sotomayor: A justice like no other," May 28, 2009
  23. ↑ BBC News, "Senate ends Sotomayor questioning," July 16, 2009
  24. ↑ Fox News, "'Meltdown'-proof? Sotomayor's confirmation assured?" July 14, 2009
  25. ↑ New York Times, "G.O.P., its eyes on high court, blocks a judge," June 13, 1998
  26. ↑ New York Times, "After delay, Senate approves judge for court in New York," October 3, 1998
  27. ↑ American Bar Association, "Ratings of Article III judicial nominees: 105th Congress (1997-1998)," accessed April 14, 2021
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 New York Times, "Woman in the news - Sotomayor, a trailblazer and a dreamer," May 27, 2009
  29. ↑ New York Times, "4 women delayed in rise to the bench," July 14, 1992
  30. ↑ New York Times, "Update; a small whittling down of federal bench vacancies," August 16, 1992
  31. ↑ Dissenting Justice, "Hatchet job: Jeffrey Rosen's utterly bankrupt analysis of Judge Sonia Sotomayor," May 4, 2009
  32. ↑ SCOTUSBlog.com, "Stat Pack archive," accessed April 22, 2016
  33. ↑ SCOTUSBlog, "Final Stat Pack for October Term 2016 and key takeaways," accessed April 16, 2018
  34. ↑ SCOTUSBlog, "Final Stat Pack for October Term 2017 and key takeaways," accessed October 4, 2018
  35. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "2020-21 Stat pack: Justice Agreement," July 2, 2021
  36. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Justice Agreement," accessed September 21, 2020
  37. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "OT18 Agreement Tables," accessed July 3, 2019
  38. ↑ Due to a change in the stat pack format, the agreement rate uses the rate of agreement in judgment.
  39. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "2020-21 Stat pack: Frequency in the majority," July 2, 2021
  40. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Frequency in the Majority," accessed September 21, 2020
  41. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "OT18 Frequency in the Majority," accessed July 3, 2019
  42. ↑ The Supreme Court Database, "Analysis," accessed June 11, 2019
  43. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "SALINAS v. UNITED STATES RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD: Slip opinion," decided February 3, 2021
  44. ↑ 44.0 44.1 44.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  45. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Herrera v. Wyoming," May 20, 2019
  46. ↑ 46.0 46.1 Cornell Law, "Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action," accessed June 24, 2014
  47. ↑ Time, "Where Sonia Sotomayor really stands on race," June 11, 2009Scroll to page 2
  48. ↑ Americans for Legal Immigration, "Where Sonia Sotomayor really stands on race:Time," June 18, 2009
  49. ↑ 49.0 49.1 49.2 New York Times, "Selected cases of Judge Sonia Sotomayor," accessed April 14, 2021 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "NYT_Selected_Cases" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "NYT_Selected_Cases" defined multiple times with different content
  50. ↑ Time, "How the Republicans will go after Sonia Sotomayor," July 13, 2009
  51. ↑ FindLaw, "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Equal Employment Opportunity," accessed April 14, 2021
  52. ↑ New York Times, "Because of race: Ricci v. DeStefano - Stanley Fish Blog," July 13, 2009
  53. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Argument recap: Ricci v. DeStefano," April 24, 2009
  54. ↑ Legal Information Institute Bulletin, "Ricci v. DeStefano," accessed April 14, 2021
  55. ↑ Cornell Law School: Legal Information Institute, "Ricci v. DeStefano," accessed April 14, 2021
  56. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Ricci v. DeStefano," accessed April 14, 2021
  57. ↑ Christian Science Monitor, "U.S. Supreme Court takes up 'reverse discrimination' case," January 9, 2009
  58. ↑ 58.0 58.1 New York Times, "Sotomayor's notable court opinions and articles," July 10, 2009
  59. ↑ OpenJurist, "Riverkeeper Inc. v. United States Envrionmental Protection Agency," accessed April 14, 2021
  60. ↑ OpenJurist, "Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush"
  61. ↑ Washington Post, "Abortion rights backers get reassurances on nominee," May 29, 2009
  62. ↑ OpenJurist, "John Malesko v. Correctional Services Corporation," accessed April 14, 2021
  63. ↑ Cornell Law School, "CASTLE ROCK ENTERTAINMENT, INC. v. CAROL PUBLISHING GROUP, 150 F.3d 132 (2nd Cir. 1998) (LOISLAW)," accessed April 14, 2021
  64. ↑ Justia.com, "Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Inc. and Beth B. Golub," accessed April 14, 2021
  65. ↑ 65.0 65.1 CNN, "Sotomayor's resume, record on notable cases," accessed April 14, 2021
  66. ↑ OpenJurist.com, "New York Times Company Inc. v. Jonathan Tasini," accessed April 14, 2021
  67. ↑ Justia.com, "New York Times Co., Inc. v. Tasini et al.," accessed April 14, 2021
  68. ↑ New York Times, "Sotomayor's baseball ruling lingers, 14 years later," May 26, 2009
  69. ↑ OpenJurist.com, "Silverman v. Major League Baseball Player Relations Committee Inc.," accessed April 14, 2021
  70. ↑ The Employment Law Post, "Sotomayor's district court decisions on traditional labor matters," June 16, 2009
  71. ↑ New York Times, "Sotomayor, baseball's savior, may be possibility for high court," May 14, 2009
  72. ↑ New York Times, "BASEBALL: Woman in the news; strike-zone arbitrator -- Sonia Sotomayor," April 1, 1995
  73. ↑ Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, "A summary of media related decisions by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor," accessed April 14, 2021
  74. ↑ U.S. Department of Justice, "FOIA update: significant new decisions (1995)," January 1, 1995
  75. ↑ First Amendment Center, "Sotomayor on the First Amendment," May 28, 2009, archived on April 23, 2010
Political offices
Preceded by
David Souter 		Supreme Court
2009 - Present 		Succeeded by
NA
Preceded by
Daniel Mahoney 		Second Circuit
1998–2009 		Succeeded by
Raymond Lohier
Preceded by
John Walker 		Southern District of New York
1991–1998 		Succeeded by
Victor Marrero



Categories: [Current, Justice of the United States Supreme Court] [Appointed by Barack Obama] [Federal judiciary nominee, June 2009] [Confirmed August 2009] [Appointed by George H.W. Bush] [Federal judiciary nominee, November 1991] [Confirmed August 1992] [Appointed by Bill Clinton] [Federal judiciary nominee, June 1997] [Confirmed October 1998] [Former_Article_III_judges]

↧ Download as ZWI file | Last modified: 12/24/2021 03:03:22 | 2 views
☰ Source: https://ballotpedia.org/Sonia_Sotomayor | License: CC BY-SA 3.0

ZWI signed:
  Encycloreader by the Knowledge Standards Foundation (KSF) ✓[what is this?]

ZWI viewer by the EncyclosphereKSF