Civilrights.org

Today, President Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace the retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Sotomayor is currently a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, where she has served since 1998. Prior to her federal judgeship, Sotomayor was a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and an assistant district attorney in Manhattan.

With experience as a prosecutor, litigator, and trial and appellate judge, Sotomayor brings more federal and overall judicial experience to the Court than any justice in the past several decades.

"Besides her superb intellectual ability and a distinguished three-decade judicial career, she brings a quality of common sense understanding of how laws affect the realities of people's daily lives," said Wade Henderson, president and CEO of LCCR. "Judge Sotomayor is also the first Latino to be nominated to the high court.  She is a first generation American and grew up in the South Bronx – fulfilling another of President Obama's promises to add diversity of background to the Supreme Court." 

Sotomayor is expected to be confirmed by the Senate in time for the next term of the Court in October.

Supreme Court Justice David Souter will reportedly retire from the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of the current term in June.

Souter was nominated by President George H.W. Bush to replace Justice William Brennan in 1990. Throughout his tenure on the Court, which includes writing 156 majority opinions, Souter has voted in support of civil and human rights in a wide range of cases dealing with issues such as free speech, the individual freedom to associate, voting rights, gay rights, the death penalty, and equal opportunity initiatives.

"Unlike recent judicial appointees, his conservatism was never at odds with his desire to uphold the rule of law and dispense justice equitably and fairly.  We wish him well on his return to private life, knowing that his judicial knowledge has supported our highest ideals of justice," said Wade Henderson, president and CEO of LCCR.

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case regarding whether states have the authority to enforce state fair lending laws against national banks and other financial institutions.

The case, Cuomo v. Clearing House Association, began in 2005 when the state of New York tried to investigate certain national banks operating in the state that it believed were charging minority borrowers higher interest rates than White borrowers.  Federal Reserve home mortgage data released that year showed that minority borrowers were given higher-interest mortgages at disproportionately higher rates than White borrowers.

Like his predecessor Elliot Spitzer, who initiated the investigation, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo wanted to determine whether banks and other lending institutions were complying with consumer and anti-discrimination laws.  The banks refused to turn over their records, arguing that only federal regulators have the power to make them disclose loan information.

However, many civil rights advocates believe that states should take greater initiative in regulating banks because the federal government isn't doing enough to prevent abuse within the mortgage industry. In their amicus, or friend-of-the-court, brief (PDF), the Center for Responsible Lending and AARP argued that "there is significant evidence that enforcement by state regulators has served an important role in protecting consumers against financial practices" and added that "consumers, communities and the economy would be ill-served by concentrating in one federal agency the authority to enforce [consumer protection laws]."  

The District of Colombia and 49 other states also submitted amicus briefs in support of the state of New York.

Yesterday, President Obama nominated David Hamilton to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The nomination is Obama's first.

Judge Hamilton is chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.  He was appointed in 1994 by President Clinton and became chief judge last year.

Federal circuit courts hear appeals from district courts on matters including interpretation of federal rules and laws, constitutionality of state and federal laws, and the district court's factual rulings.  Circuit court decisions typically have the final say in a case. They can be reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is the highest judicial body in the nation, but the Supreme Court actually agrees to look at only a small fraction of circuit court decisions. 

There are currently 15 vacancies on the federal circuit courts.  Judicial nominees must typically be confirmed by the Senate in order to sit on a circuit court.   

The judges that serve on federal courts have a powerful impact on our lives.  Partisan fighting in the U.S. Senate over judicial nominations makes the process of nominating and confirming fair and impartial judges to these courts difficult.

• The New York Times urged President Obama not to allow partisan fighting to influence his choices, which should be the "highly qualified, progressive-minded judges the nation needs."
• In an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times, Dahlia Lithwick, senior editor at Slate, said that federal judges matter "too much to have their nominations and confirmations take place on the sticky bathroom floors of American politics."