Author Damon Root makes his points well in underscoring significant reservations about Sonia Sotomayor's past rulings and how they are likely to affect future Supreme Court decisions if her nomination stands. He breaks new ground in judging Sotomayor's attitude toward the Second Amendment as "hostile." Anyone who expresses a primary concern for libertarian ideals should read this article.

Here's an opinion piece that isn't favorable to Sotomayor that was at least executed with some form. Creating a link between causes of Supreme Court recognition was at least artful. Its conclusion however of citing Nordyke v. King may not actually make the point. In fact I encourage readers to look at the case involving a County looking to stop Gun Shows on Country property. To include that in this article out of context is mind-boggling. It seems to me that Root's comparisons serves only to provide half truths that are close enough to seemingly make his point. This was silly - however respectable silly since he chose to inform or misinform in 'form'

Not exactly. The article focus on the issues behind the lawsuits mentioned, not on the issue before the court, the issue actually ruled on. In Ricci v. Destefano, the court was asked to determine whether the city was within its legal right to not certify the test. The court drew on precedent to rule that it was. In Maloney v. Cuomo the court again ruled using precedent. To do otherwise would have been the dreaded judicial activism. A little more research would have ferreted out this information. Eigher that, or the author chose to ignore this.