Sonia Sotomayor Quotes

A judge who likes every opinion he reaches is a bad judge.

It's important not to get into the business of characterizing judges based on one decision they make

[Discussing the confirmation process:] A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints, for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would display disdain for the entire judicial process.

If a judge does his job right, you [the observer] will never know how he personally feels about the policies he may have to rule on.

The judge may not … express his … personal beliefs ... as to what is right or just

Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.

You can have many different selection systems, but the bottom line has to be a system that, once the judge takes office that judge will feel that he or she is to decide the case without reference to the popular thing or the popular will of the moment.

They might object to some of my opinions, but they don't object to my behavior as a judge.

When it is left entirely to a judge to decide whether he should give place to another he becomes a judge in his case....

It has not been unknown that judges persist in error to avoid giving the appearance of weakness and vacillation.

If you're going to be a good and faithful judge, you have to resign yourself to the fact that you're not always going to like the conclusions you reach. If you like them all the time, you're probably doing something wrong.

Judges ... rule on the basis of law, not public opinion, and they should be totally indifferent to pressures of the times.

The truth is that the D.C. Circuit is an admirably nonideological court that applies principles of administrative law evenhandedly.

What I've learned over the years... judges are conscientious... not like lawyers, who give opinions.

The worst thing you want is a willy-nilly judge who is swayed by the political whims of the era or the time. What you want is a judge who is thinking about what he or she is doing and is thinking about it in a principled way.

Finally, a good prosecutor knows that her job is to enforce the law without fear or favor. Likewise, a Supreme Court Justice must interpret the laws without fear or favor.

I don't know how a judge can concentrate on being fair and impartial when he or she is faced with possible jail time for making a decision that others deem incorrect.

I do not think that we should select judges based on a particular philosophy as opposed to temperament, commitment to judicial neutrality and commitment to other more constant values as to which there is general consensus.

…if I should once permit such political considerations to interfere with the administration of justice in this office, where could I stop? If I should once begin to allow my official conduct to be swayed by considerations such as those, I feel it would end by eventually leading me wholly astray.

A judge's duty is to grant justice, but his practice is to delay it: even those judges who know their duty adhere to the general practice.

Judges shall judge justly, according to the written law and not according to their own judgment.

No man must be Judge who propounds unto himself any hope of profit, or glory, from the victory of either party.

Our system presumes that there are certain principles that are more important than the temper of the times. And you must have a judge who is detached, who is independent, who is fair, who is committed only to those principles, and not public pressures of other sort.

A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge... stretching for results he prefers rather than those the law demands.

Practicing in the trial work trenches of the law, I saw, too, that when we judges don our robes, it doesn't make us any smarter, but it does serve as a reminder of what's expected of us: Impartiality and independence, collegiality and courage.