White House Refuses to Release Some Sotomayor Papers
The White House is refusing to release some papers that may shed some light on Sonia Sotomayor’s positions while she was an adviser to the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund. The White House is claiming that because she didn’t make any official decisions and was just an adviser that these papers are irrelevant.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, who asked for the papers disagrees:
During her time there, the organization took extreme positions on legal issues ranging from the death penalty to abortion to racial quotas,” Sessions said in a statement. He said it was “absurd” for the White House to call the documents irrelevant
The notion that Sotomayor had no role in what the organization did seems to be not quite the truth either as she did have a leadership role on the board.
Sessions noted, however, that Sotomayor held leadership posts on the group’s board
These papers are being withheld for a reason, and considering the fact that Sotomayor has been overturned by the very court that she will soon be appointed to over 60% of the time, the latest being just last week, the White House is looking to avoid further embarrassment.
Much like the administration did with the “torture” documents, the administration seems to be picking and choosing just the papers that they want to release and holding on to those they don’t want to be seen.
There must be something in these papers that they don’t want to be seen, if there is nothing condemning to Sotomayor in the papers why not release them, even if they turn out to be irrelevant?
They are not irrelevant, and they must be condemning or else the administration would release them. If they turned out to actually be irrelevant wouldn’t it be an embarrassment to the Republicans to have made such a big deal about this? The administration would lose nothing by releasing these documents, unless there is something in there. We will never know. Open and honest? Transparent? I think not.
America's Watchtower 
There’s even more than that being withheld.
Are you familiar with her stance on the Jeffrey Deskovic case?
I have been trying to get this story noticed by the MSM, and have been stonewalled.
Jeffrey also left a comment along with some info on what you can do to get this in the news.
I hope I’m not intruding with this comment, and if I am please remove it. If not, please spread it around
Thanks,
Anthony
Here’s an excerpt from my post on this:
“It is a single line on Page 120 of the appendix to Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire – the document listing all of the cases the U.S. Supreme Court nominee has heard as a federal Court of Appeals judge. But it is the only one of the judge’s cases that really matters to Jeffrey Deskovic, who spent nearly 16 years in prison for a Peekskill murder he did not commit.
In April 2000, Sotomayor and a colleague on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Rosemary Pooler, upheld a court ruling refusing to overturn Deskovic’s conviction. Neither court considered the DNA evidence that he argued would exonerate him – because his lawyer submitted the writ of habeas corpus paperwork four days late in 1997.
Because of that refusal, Deskovic would spend six more years in prison. He was finally exonerated in 2006, after a DNA match linked another inmate to 15-year-old Angela Correa’s 1989 killing, and that man, Stephen Cunningham, confessed.
“She put procedure over justice. We’re talking about a man’s life,” said Deskovic, who opposes Sotomayor’s nomination and wants the opportunity to speak at her Senate confirmation hearings. “She, in effect, condemned me to serve a life sentence in prison for something I was innocent of without even looking at my innocence issue.”
If you’d like to read more, go to http://thesibylspeaks.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/jeffrey-deskovic-on-jeffrey-deskovic/
LikeLike
in life we are all taught 2 and lose. sad 2 say but so is the the way of our justice system.
do u mock someone because she/he fell on the wrong side of a judicial cast? if this b the case
we’re all mud.
LikeLike
This is not surprising, the white house under Obama is more politized than at anytime before. Politics as usual rules and the only change are steps toward more government control and socialism.
LikeLike
But I thought this was going to be the most open and honest administration ever. 🙂
LikeLike