I normally hold to a strict policy of “if everyone else is saying it [or will be saying it], don’t add to the cacophony.” However, today I am making an exception.

This is Sonia Sotomayor’s now well-known comment that appellate courts are “where policy is made:”

Apologists for the Honorable Justice insist that the full clip shows she was referring to the distinction between nonprecedental district court decisions and those of appellate courts (which do set precedent). I think that her slightly uncomfortable chuckling about the offhand remark is a tell – she clearly understands that this comment could be brought up again later in her career, and that this could be problematic, regardless of context. The tone of the statement seems remarkably akin to that assumed by most Americans when we assert our intention to voluntarily report all taxable income to the IRS.

Anyway, today’s sound byte is her statement that “the task of a judge is not to make law, it is to apply the law:”

Well, imagine my relief.

I’m of the opinnion that good judges who understand their role can be found in the favor of both parties, and am more than willing to give Sotomayor the benefit of the doubt. However, I can find no way to reconcile these two statements. I have only a limited knowledge of legal philosophy, but I think it is quite evident there is a conflict here. She needs to be grilled on this and forced to explain herself.

As a “wise Latina woman,” I’m sure this will be a piece of cake.