Letter: Sowell column distorts meaning of empathy

The headline of Thomas Sowell's May 5 column, " ‘Empathy' versus law," is a false dichotomy that befits a column that bizarrely distorts the meaning of empathy and then obscenely compares President Barack Obama's "rhetoric" with "the law that gave Hitler dictatorial power."

(For a more reasoned analysis by Douglas W. Kmiec, the conservative former dean of Catholic University and Reagan assistant attorney general Office of Legal Counsel, see "The case for empathy: Why a much-maligned value is a crucial qualification for the Supreme Court.")

Empathy - understanding other people's perspectives - avoids biases and misunderstandings from over-reliance on judges' narrow, privileged and insulated experience.

In Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court invented a theoretical "separate but equal" justification for enforced segregation. But the Brown v. Board of Education court realized impacts on schoolchildren were "inherently unequal" and unconstitutional.

Judges are not computers; they must understand how the U.S. Constitution and laws were written to alleviate real problems people face in many different circumstances.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told USA Today that during pregnancy leave and pay discrimination oral arguments, her colleagues showed "a certain lack of understanding" of job bias women can face.

President George W. Bush and a unanimous Congress restored Americans With Disabilities Act protections that were gutted when the court misunderstood why they were written.

Glenn Sugameli is senior counsel for Earthjustice, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit environmental law firm; Web site: www.earthjustice.org.