While conservative critics of Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the United States Supreme Court have pointed to the number of times her rulings in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit which reached the Supreme Court have been reversed by the Supreme Court (three times in five cases), it is worth noting that last week the Solicitor General of the United States, in an amicus brief urging the Court to grant a writ of certiorari, argued that her reasoning in a dissenting opinion is the correct view of the law.
The petition before the Court in Abbott v. Abbott raises a question of the correct interpretation of an important clause of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The federal circuit courts of appeals have divided on the question, and Judge Sotomayor dissented from the interpretation of the majority on the Second Circuit. Croll v. Croll, 229 F.3d 133.
In a case which brings up for review a decision of the Fifth Circuit, the Solicitor General argues that Judge Sotomayor's interpretation in Croll is correct, and that the Supreme Court should grant the writ of certiorari and adopt Judge Sotomayor's reasoning. See, Abbott v. Abbott.