I am not expressing an opinion one way or the other on President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court. I can see why many Democrats are pleased and why many Republicans are weary.

But, I do have a couple of thoughts about the process.

First, it seems to me that the debate should be fair. It is reasonable to object to Judge Sotomayor on the basis of her judicial decisions, her public statements, or her perceived stances on hot button social issues. But, I have already heard many saying she has less experience than many other Supreme Court nominees.

During our 5pm news we aired a story about the nomination. In it, Ilya Shapiro, a Supreme Court analyst from the CATO Institute, said, “She’s not the most qualified nominee. If she weren’t Hispanic she wouldn’t have even been on the short list.”

I think even President Obama would admit that Sotomayor’s ethnicity played a role in her selection. However, it is unfair to say it was the only reason, as Shapiro implies. It is also unfair to say she’s not the most qualified nominee. She’s been on the federal bench since 1992 and before that was an assistant district attorney.

Compare that to Chief Justice John Roberts’ experience before he was nominated to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 2005. According to a government website, he had served on the federal bench for just two years and had short stints in the Justice Department and the White House Counsel’s office. I’m not saying Justice Roberts wasn’t qualified for the High Court, only that Sotomayor obviously exceeds that level of experience.

My second point deals with how our senators should vote. Republicans railed against Democrats during George Bush’s two terms when they threatened or did use the filibuster to block judicial appointments. They even held a sleep-in, complete with cots, to demonstrate their outrage. In my opinion, their outrage was justified. Using the filibuster during judicial hearings seems a misuse of that power. Now, the shoe is on the other foot, so to speak. And my opinion on this issue hasn’t changed. The filibuster should not be used in the cases of judicial appointments. I wonder if the GOP still has that view?

Finally, let us remember that elections have consequences. A majority of Americans voted for Barack Obama in November. He won by the largest margin we had seen in two decades. Americans assessed his voting record in the US Senate (the most liberal of all his colleagues) and his public stances and picked him over Republican John McCain. They knew full well he would most likely have the opportunity to select at least one if not two or three justices. That is immense power. We should not be surprised that President Obama’s selection would mirror his own judicial philosophy. That’s how the system works.

Again, I am not saying whether Judge Sotomayor should be confirmed. Frankly, I don’t know enough about her to offer an opinion. But, I do think the ground rules should be fair.