Judging Sonia

Our President this morning released his pick to replace the retiring Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court.  It's Federal Appellate judge Sonia Sotomayor.  

If confirmed she would be the first Hispanic justice and only the third woman on the top bench.  The pundits are predicting this will make her a difficult target for conservatives anxious to squelch her nomination.  But they are also predicting the conservatives will try anyway, attacking Judge Sotomayor as an 'activist judge'.

I've personally never understood that term.  How much room in the constitution does a justice have for activism anyway?  They can't make an entirely new law.   They can't fundamentally change an existing law to bring about a dramatically different result.  

Judges, however, can overturn a law if they find it is unconstitutional. And, in some cases, judges can 'interpret' the meaning and intent of a law and use that interpretation to decide the case outcome.  In these situations political bias towards 'conservative' or 'liberal' can have an effect, but is this 'activism'?  

You can reasonably expect prospective justice Sotomayor to be liberal.  Otherwise President Obama wouldn't have considered her to replace Souter.  But an activist?  No more so that Clarence Thomas is an activist, or Antonin Scalia.  

It would be better if everyone ('conservatives' and 'liberals' and 'in-betweens', alike) judge Sonia Sotomayor's appointment on issues other than 'activism'.  Issues like experience, performance, dedication, and fairness.