But that is unlikely to stop conservatives from trying to paint her as a liberal and activist judge.

If approved, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, 54, of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, would replace retiring Justice David Souter. The choice probably won't affect the ideological balance of the court.

But Sotomayor would bring to the court a diversity it has lacked for most of its history. Of the 110 justices, 106 have been white males. Sotomayor would become the first Hispanic justice and just the court's third woman.

Her background reads like an American success story. Born in the Bronx to parents from Puerto Rico, Sotomayor was only 9 years old when her father died. Her mother, a nurse, sometimes worked two jobs to raise her and her brother in public housing.

Sotomayor excelled academically at Princeton University and Yale Law School and then worked as a prosecutor, in the New York district attorney's office.

Conservatives have already questioned Sotomayor's legal firepower, conveniently forgetting she was appointed to the federal bench in 1991 by President George H.W. Bush.

Among her noteworthy legal rulings, Sotomayor issued an injunction against Major League Baseball owners in 1995 that effectively ended a players' strike. (Former Inquirer columnist Claude Lewis praised Sotomayor at the time for saving the baseball season and joining "the ranks of Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, Jackie Robinson and Ted Williams.")

Sotomayor also was on a three-judge panel that upheld a lower court's decision to throw out test results in the city of New Haven's firefighter exam after only one minority firefighter scored high enough to qualify for a promotion. That ruling is on appeal to the Supreme Court.

Presidents deserve deference from the Senate in the choice of their judicial nominees. It's one reason this Editorial Board supported President George W. Bush's nominations of John Roberts Jr. and Samuel Alito, although we didn't embrace their conservative outlook.

At this early stage of Sotomayor's nomination, there doesn't appear to be any serious reason for Republican senators to throw up a roadblock, assuming they could.

Conservatives want to make an issue out of President Obama's search for "empathy" in a nominee. And they criticize Sotomayor for a speech in 2001 in which she said that being a woman of color affects her decisions.

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life," she said.

Race or ethnic background does not determine the quality of a decision any more than shoe size does. Regardless, neither of these comments from the president and Sotomayor is sinister or shocking.

No judge comes to the bench as a blank slate. All jurists bring with them an accumulation of life experiences that affect their outlook and philosophy. It's as true for Sotomayor as it is for Antonin Scalia.

Conservatives also criticize Sotomayor as an activist because she said appellate judges create "policy." Their argument is malarkey. When judges apply the law to a set of facts, they clarify the law, i.e., "set policy" - whether they are conservative or liberal.

The Senate has a duty to examine Sotomayor's qualifications rigorously and fairly. But she appears to have the experience and the temperament to merit Obama's confidence.