Has Sotomayor exhibited a pattern of favoritism to minorities in race-related cases during her more than 10 years on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit?

The answer is no, according to Tom Goldstein of Akin Gump’s Washington office, a leading Supreme Court litigator. He has published on SCOTUSBlog, in two installments, the results of his own study of the 97 race-related cases Sotomayor has helped decide on the appeals court.

After summarizing statistics indicating that Sotomayor is not especially prone to rule for plaintiffs in discrimination cases and rarely disagrees with her 2nd Circuit colleagues in such cases, Goldstein concludes:

"Given that record, it seems absurd to say that Sotomayor allows race to infect her decisionmaking."

Others may look at the same cases and draw different conclusions. And Goldstein’s analysis does not altogether dispel my concerns that once on the Supreme Court, Sotomayor’s sympathies for particular groups may skew her views of the facts and the law. See my past columns here, here and here.

For the best detailed dissection of Sotomayor’s 2001 speech, by Steve Chapman, read his column in the Sunday Chicago Tribune.

But with respect to Sotomayor’s overall record in race-related cases on the appeals court, Goldstein’s analysis is reassuring. Her critics now have the burden of showing either that Goldstein’s analysis is wrong or that the nominee’s record on the appeals court is not a valid predicter of what she would do on the Supreme Court.

The post Study Finds No Sotomayor Bias in Race-Related Cases – The Ninth Justice appeared first on Stuart Taylor, Jr..