Not surprisingly, the New York Times' editorial page is a fan of the pick. "Based on what we know now, the Senate should confirm her so she can join the court when it begins its new term in October."
And not surprisingly, the Wall Street Journal's isn't. "As the first nominee of a popular President and with 59 Democrats in the Senate, Judge Sotomayor is likely to be confirmed barring some major blunder. But Republicans can use the process as a teaching moment, not to tear down Ms. Sotomayor on personal issues the way the left tried with Justices Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito, but to educate Americans about the proper role of the judiciary and to explore whether Judge Sotomayor's Constitutional principles are as free-form as they seem from her record."
The Washington Post's editorial page: "Senators are right to closely scrutinize Judge Sotomayor's philosophy and qualifications. She has produced a rich record of opinions as an appeals court judge for the Judiciary Committee to discuss. Senators also should remember that Mr. Obama, like any president, is entitled to deference in choosing a justice."
The Boston Globe's Canellos raises this point: "The Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, a candidate more likely than some on President Obama's short list to arouse Republican opposition, could complicate the president's task on another major agenda item -- healthcare."
And New York sports-writer-turned-occasional-political-columnist Mike Lupica throws cold water on the assertion that Sotomayor saved baseball. "There is a difference between saving a season -- and a union -- and saving a sport," Lupica writes, adding, "Sotomayor, succeeding where even President Clinton had failed, absolutely ended a work stoppage that had lasted a total of 233 days. She saved the sorry leaders of the Major League Baseball Players Association, a union still under the arrogant impression at the time that it ought to run baseball… The President doesn't need to pad [her resume] with hyperbole. We get enough of that in sports. We have enough instant legends already." He argues the sport didn't really begin to change until revenue sharing and the luxury tax were implemented."