The contributors to the Point of Law legal blog have been analyzing Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s writings and judicial record, providing some insight into how she would rule as a U.S. Supreme Court justice. James Copland, Director of the Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute — sponsor of the website — recently added to a dicussion of her views on tort reform.

A 1996 Suffolk University Law Review article by her suggest Sotomayor is skeptical of experts, “hired hands,” used in personal injury litigation. However, she also criticized legislative efforts to bring rationality to the civil justice system by introducing caps on economic damage awards. In our view, that’s an entirely appropriate policy to ensure a consistent application of the law and end capricious, outrageous jury awards that serve as a “tort tax” on business and the economy. Sotomayor describes such tort reforms as “overreactions that undermine the principles of our judicial system.”

Copland:

Even if Judge Sotomayor’s comments are read merely to express policy disagreement, they are troubling. If her notion is even stronger — that tort reforms such as the Common Sense Product Liability Legal Reform Act of 1996 are in fact unconstitutional — then I agree with Ted [Frank's] conclusion that her “argument is not just a statement of judicial activism, it’s a disturbing statement of judicial supremacy over the other branches of government.” Given the strength of her claims — that such laws “undermine the principles of our judicial system” and are “inconsistent with the premise of the jury system” — the less charitable reading seems more than plausible. In any event, I echo Ted’s “hope [that] someone on the Senate Judiciary Committee inquires into it.”

Point of Law has a category devoted to the Sotomayor nomination here. A good colloquy and useful information for those wondering how her views might affect business and the economy.

A round-up of commentary and reporting on President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court, focusing on the implications for business and business law…

Walter Olson of the Manhattan Institute has a dispassionate, analytical piece at Overlawyered.com, “Obama’s ‘Wise Latina’“:

Issues of business law don’t come across as Sotomayor’s great passion one way or the other, so it’s hard to know what all this portends for the high court’s direction on business issues should she be confirmed. As Home Depot’s Bernard Marcus and others have pointed out, for all of David Souter’s predictable role on the court’s liberal side in most high-profile cases, he in fact steered to middle-of-the-road, hard-to-characterize views on many issues of litigation, liability and procedure, either as a swing vote or as the author of opinions. (Two key issues to watch: what sort of constitutional restraints, if any, there are on punitive damages, and how much scrutiny judges should give to initial pleadings to determine whether a federal lawsuit ought to go forward.)

Some of her backers say they expect that Sotomayor will emerge as a liberal in the less than fiery, relatively “legalistic” Ginsburg/Breyer mold. Even assuming that happens, some outcomes will soon change in a direction most businesses will find adverse. And in coming weeks, both friends and foes will be going over her published opinions–some with hope, others with dread–for clues to whether she might form the nucleus of some future new and more seriously left-wing faction on the court.

Also reporting on Sotomayor and business was Nathan Koppel at the Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog, “Sotomayor and Business: ‘No Reason . . . to be Concerned’“:

The judge, for example, has sided with defendants in cases involving the standards that govern when cases can be brought as a class actions and the extent to which plaintiffs’ claims can be preempted by more defense-friendly federal or international laws.

“There is no reason for the business community to be concerned,” says Lauren Rosenblum Goldman, a partner at Mayer Brown LLP. The judge has “ruled in favor of preemption about half of the times” that the issue has been presented to her, she says.

Two cases that went before the Second Circuit of Appeals on which Judge Sotomayor sits were certainly high-profile ones that concerned business; the National Association of Manufacturers was involved through filing of amicus briefs.

From the White House, “Remarks by the President in nominating Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court.”

I don’t take this decision lightly.  I’ve made it only after deep reflection and careful deliberation.  While there are many qualities that I admire in judges across the spectrum of judicial philosophy, and that I seek in my own nominee, there are few that stand out that I just want to mention.

First and foremost is a rigorous intellect — a mastery of the law, an ability to hone in on the key issues and provide clear answers to complex legal questions.  Second is a recognition of the limits of the judicial role, an understanding that a judge’s job is to interpret, not make, law; to approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda, but rather a commitment to impartial justice; a respect for precedent and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand.

These two qualities are essential, I believe, for anyone who would sit on our nation’s highest court.  And yet, these qualities alone are insufficient.  We need something more.  For as Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.”  Experience being tested by obstacles and barriers, by hardship and misfortune; experience insisting, persisting, and ultimately overcoming those barriers.  It is experience that can give a person a common touch and a sense of compassion; an understanding of how the world works and how ordinary people live.  And that is why it is a necessary ingredient in the kind of justice we need on the Supreme Court.

The White House blog provides more background:

The Law School Admission Council has a video discussing her story as part of their “Believe and Achieve: Latinos and the Law” program that is  also well worth watching. Finally, the White House also sent out the following background, giving a thorough look at Judge Sotomayor’s life and career.

The New York Times has the news about the President’s 10:15 a.m. announcement, “Obama Chooses Sotomayor for Supreme Court Nominee”

The National Journal’s always excellent legal reporter, Stuart Taylor, wrote a critical column about her in the latest issue, “Identity Politics And Sotomayor.” The subhed is “The judge’s thinking is representative of the Democratic Party’s powerful identity-politics wing.”

From Reuters, “Obama’s pick may not shift Supreme Court direction“:

The experts said Souter’s replacement would face important business issues, including whether to put new constitutional limits on punitive damage awards designed to punish companies for past misconduct.

“Our general preference is for judges who follow what is written in the law and who do not make up new rights,” said Quentin Riegel, vice president for litigation at the National Association of Manufacturers.

He hoped Obama would appoint someone with experience in business cases, similar to John Roberts whom then-President George W. Bush appointed as chief justice in 2005.

To summarize: Souter replacement may or may not have an effect on the court, and NAM favors rule-of-law judges who understand business.

CBS News reports many more stories on workforce skills and training than the other TV networks (or so it seems to us), and the correspondents have a good sense of the issues.  On Tuesday’s CBS Evening News, for example, a story comparing the two presidential candidates’ records on eduction and training was packaged within a report on manufacturing jobs in Florida, blue collar careers more attractive given today’s financial turmoil.

Like a lot of guys with a finance career, Peter Halpern was watching the economy and worrying about supporting his wife, Eva, and daughter, Katrina.

To deal with the heat and pressure, Halpern turned … to heat and pressure.

“When the sparks are flying, and the tools are grinding, and you hear the noise,” he said. “I love it.”

After years in the white-collar world, Halpern is becoming a welder.

Halpern folded his investment firm and enrolled in a worker training program in Pinellas County. Prospects for employment are good, especially given the demand for workers to help refurbish and build new nuclear power plants.  As Lee Middleton, Halpern’s welding instructor, says:

All the baby boomers are retiring, and there is nobody to replace them. Now all these people are realizing this and they’re coming for the money and the benefits - and the future,” Middleton said.

At $30 an hour, plus lots of overtime, you can reach six figures quickly.