Clarification

We hope we weren’t being too obtuse or coy in our post last week that was meant to juxtapose what is required of a juror vs. some relevant quotes from prospective and former justices on the Supreme Court. So, just to clear up any confusion, Andrew McCarthy wonders, here, if Judge Sotomayor would see the light of the jury box if she dropped the “Latina woman” hammer on a judge or an inquiring lawyer during the jury selection questioning?

At the end of the day, though, we’re probably going with Krauthammer's advise: Criticize, then confirm.

Let’s let Ms. Sotomayor’s judicial philosophy be exposed to the light (like, how much is she and by extension the Democratic party beholden to identity politics) and confirm her as her ascension to the high court does not necessarily alter the balance of the court and because the numbers in the Senate are not there and, hopefully some degree of deference to the Presidents' choices can be returned to a process that has been nuked by Senate Democrats. Or, as can be summed up in this says-it-all headline from Jack Tapper:

“First President in US History to Have Voted to Filibuster a Supreme Court Nominee Now Hopes for Clean Process”

We'll jump right on that, sir.