Sotomayor thinks capital punishment is racism...do you agree or disagree and WHY?

If 90% of violent cries are committed by a certain demographic, then are demographics racist as well?

Ok, in the context of the article, it states that the concern was the quality of legal counsel representing the defendants.

My reasoning: Pro Bono cases (work without or with little pay) is not something that high quality and busy attorneys generally do. Their time is worth a lot of money. Therefore, if a person is poor, it is indeed likely that the services of a public defender will be used...rather than an attorney of choice. And from my own observations, a public defender just doesnt do an adequate job....especially in high risk cases where the death penalty could be melded out.

Take the O.J. Simpson trial for example. If Simpson had been poor, he would have likely been convicted of the crime because his attorney would not have had the funds or the ability to do what Simpson's masterful crew did. I am not saying that Simpson was guilty or innocent...only that he would have likely been convicted based on the regular evidence.

So I can not disagree with the concept that Sotomayor provided in that instance. As a lot of poor people...are also people of color, it is possible that a greater percentage of them are convicted than lets say people from mid to high income capability who can afford to hire better attorneys....and often those people are white.

I do not think this is so much a racial issue as it is an economic one.

I highly doubt, that capital punishment works. There are some problems with it: It's irreversible, meaning you can't unkill someone if you find out he/she was actually not guilty (as I heard there are quite a few cases like that). I don't think that the scaring off tactic works. In Iran they cut off the hands of thieves. So the benefit ratio to steal is way low. Yet they still have thieves in Iran. Crime is to a very big part a social problem. The other problem with the scaring off tactic is that the execution itself has to remain humaine. The only way I could support capital punishment would be, if the relatives of the victim were allowed to torture the murderer to death. That way the victims family would get a just revenge. I think you're quite unlucky to have to support the death penalty in a debate, because I don't think there are any rational arguments, that support it. So you will probably have to take an emotional approach, contrasting the poor victim and the gruesome murderer. I wish you the best of luck

Allow me to point out to you that white men are the greater majority who are at the tip of the sword in capital punishment and the death sentence from 1953-2007. If we were to blindly accept your inference that Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor equated capital punishment with racism, then it would lead people to think she is prejudicial in her judicial orientation. On the surface, it looks as if she is defending latinos or blacks, not so, the statistics show she is defending the white male. Please do yourself a favor and look at the hot link below.

On the issue of race. Many cannot speak to the complexities of race and articulate with any reasonable accuracy, racism. Your leaning question would be a good example in light of the statistical facts. Racism in America is institutional. Mr. Thomas Tancredo (R) from Colorado's 6th Congressional District had a recent melt down about the National Council of La Raza. Which literally means the "The Race" referring to people of Latin decent. On a news interview he lost his way. I think he was trying to point to institutionalized racism within La Raza. Instead, he forcefully spitted his point of view all over the camera, defeating whatever it was he was trying to say. In my opinion, institutionalized racism is the intersection where we need to have a national discussion. This one off example that your question tries to inflate about one latin judge on a three judge panel is cheap.

I will assume you know more than one language. The interpretation of the language can be a source of consternation. I will make another assumption about you. I will assume you are a Bible believer of some type. Through the years the Bible has been written in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic and English to name a few. What words specifically mean must be researched to respond with any credibility the meaning of the text in the context of the narrative. Unique to American and British culture, is the argument of race based on skin color causing one to have an advantage over another. This approach is a very simplistic view of race relative to culture. On the globe, the arguments are about dominant and co-dominant cultures linked to land. The word Hispanic is an insult to people of Latin origin. Furthermore, the use of the word Hispanic does not refer to a heritage linked to a country, a land, or a history of note. To be Latin, refers to Latin America. Therefore, a so called Hispanic can not be racist, because their is no such thing. There is no base from which a "Hispanic" can be racists, no source. Supreme Court Justice Sonia SO TOE MY YOUR is a latina. Which means a latin woman. So the question that a hispanic by definition can be racist, demonstrates ignorance on your part as well as mine.

What Supreme Court Justice candidate Sonia Sotomayor pointed to was the inequality to white men. I do not believe this latina woman qualifies as racist. Unless you qualify her standing up for white men is racist. Now that is prejudice, which we can leave for discussion another day.

So far, I haven't found anything this woman has said that I can agree with. Here whole agenda is to promote the minority advancement in this country and disregarding the crimes associated with their actions.

Sotomayor is a revolutionist and Obama is ready to give her even more power to advance the Hugo Chavez style agenda that preoccupies hers and Obama's hidden goals.

The Congress has the ability to deny this most unholy cause, it's time these people quit this unpatriotic partisanship and ruled as a branch of government to protect the people, not a renegade in the White House !

Like most liberals, she has her priorities back @ssward. They prefer killing the babies, and letting heinous murderers off the hook !

I disagree with her on this & every thing else she will try to change. Over 700 on death row in Ca.after fair trails , where every excuse was offered toward leniency. These killers now will keep attacking the judicial system questioning technicalities of little significance for 20 or more years keeping the justice system mired in RED tape. Kill them and be DONE ! Next!

Just another harebrained "judgment" of this racist judge.

It's racism to her if it is a minority member who is executed.

I don't hear her squealing about the execution of white offenders.

BTW, I am bi-racial but I also have eyes, ears, and a mind.

I think ANY criminal convicted of a crime that warrants the death penalty should be executed....as soon as possible.

Edit: To the poster below....I do not for an instant believe she was defending white males.

I think this lame brained minority is confusing institutionalized racism with institutionalized disregard for the law. Unfortunately she's only had the experience of a Hispanic woman and not experience that would have raised her awareness of a law abiding society in which there are repercussions that fit the crime. Doesn't say much for her heritage.

First of all, anything you read in the Wash. Times you should verify it somewhere else before posting it. 8^)

95% of the people on death row were indigent at the time of their trial and had to rely on a public defender. If a person is actually able to hire his own lawyer to defend himself, prosecutors very rarely ask for the death penalty. Thus the death penalty is selectively enforce, based on class, not race.

There was a famous study in the 1970s that showed that the race of the -victim- mattered more than the race of the perpetrator. People who murdered white victims were found to be much more likely to get the death penalty than people who murdered black or hispanic victims.

No it is not, and the fact that obviously all that college or what ever she did to get where she is did not teach her anything and if capital punishment is 'racist' as she says, than why the **** did she become a judge? Honestly? SO NO IT IS NOT.

It don't matter who you are, race, creed, beliefs.. If you commit a crime you shall pay your price to society at the full extent of the law, what ever it may be.

I disagree...that is the most ridiculous argument I have yet to hear on the topic of capital punishment. You can usually count on liberals to pull out the racism card when they have run out of actual arguments.

Peace