Senate Panel Endorses Sotomayor in 13-6

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Senate Panel Endorses Sotomayor in 13-6
4
Tue, 07-28-2009 - 3:00pm

Senate Panel Endorses Sotomayor in 13-6 Vote


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/us/politics/29confirm.html?hp


The Senate Judiciary Committee voted, 13 to 6, on Tuesday to endorse the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, easing her path to likely confirmation as the first Hispanic member of the tribunal.


As expected, all 12 Democrats on the judiciary panel voted for Judge Sotomayor, after praising her intellect, character and inspiring personal history. But among the seven Republicans on the committee, only Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina voted in favor.


The committee action sends the nomination to the full Senate, where her confirmation by a comfortable margin seems to be assured.


Some committee members who are far apart on the political spectrum agreed on one thing: In recent years, Supreme Court nominees have embraced the strategy of saying as little as possible about their views on issues, so as not to antagonize the senators.In casting his vote, Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who heads the committee, said that when he was a trial lawyer, he always hoped to be in front of a judge who would “make up his or her mind based on the law, not on who the litigants are.”


“And having reviewed her record, I know that Judge Sonia Sotomayor has been that kind of judge,” Mr. Leahy said. “I have every confidence that she’ll be that kind of justice.”


Republican critics of the judge expressed displeasure with her rulings as a member of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, as well as with some of her public comments. The rulings and comments show that she is a judge who is too “activist” and liberal and has too little commitment to the rights of gun owners, the critics complained.


Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the committee’s leading Republican, said just before the vote that he was compelled to oppose the nomination because in some important cases the judge’s decisions were “unacceptably short” and showed a “liberal, pro-government ideology against the individuals asserting their constitutional rights.”


Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said Mr. Sessions’ questioning of the nominee had been “sharp but fair.” Still, Mr. Schumer said, he was perplexed that anyone could accuse the nominee of being a liberal activist, since an examination of her record shows her to be a moderate.


Barring some totally unforeseen event or shocking disclosure, confirmation is inevitable, since the Democrats have a 60-to-40 advantage in the Senate, counting two independents who vote with them. Moreover, several Republicans in addition to Mr. Graham have announced that they will vote for her.


Mr. Graham said he supported the nomination, despite early reservations. “I feel good about Judge Sotomayor,” he said, adding he was sure that she would decide cases “based on what she thinks is right” and be an inspiration for young women. The Senate is expected to debate the nomination next week, so Judge Sotomayor is likely to be sworn in as the Supreme Court’s first Hispanic justice (and only its third woman) in time for the start of the high court’s next term in the autumn.


As for how much, or how little, Supreme Court nominees are willing to say, Senators Russell D. Feingold and Herb Kohl, both Wisconsin Democrats, expressed the hope that the judiciary committee could find ways “to achieve the greater candor that the confirmation process demands and that the American people deserve,” as Mr. Kohl put it.


Senator Tom Coburn, a conservative Republican from Oklahoma, said he agreed with the Wisconsin senators “that we can’t get real answers in these hearings.” But Mr. Coburn said he had learned enough about the nominee (“this very fine woman”) to vote against her, with regret.


Judge Sotomayor’s Hispanic heritage — her parents moved to New York City from Puerto Rico — may have been an advantage when President Obama was poring over his short list of candidates to replace Justice David H. Souter, but her allusions to it have caused her some trouble.


The judge’s observation that “a wise Latina woman” might come to a better decision than a white man, at least in some circumstances, was heavily criticized during the committee hearing, and her detractors seemed not entirely persuaded by her attempts to disown her past statements, or at least put them in better context.


Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, said he struggled with his decision and had decided “with regret” to vote against the judge. He said his opposition was based on a close study of her rulings — unlike, he said, the opposition of Barack Obama in 2005, when he was a Senator, to the nomination of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to be chief justice.


Mr. Hatch asserted that Mr. Obama’s vote against the Roberts nomination appeared to have been prompted simply by his belief that the jurist would rule in ways that Mr. Obama did not like. But the committee’s newest member, Al Franken, Democrat of Minnesota, suggested during the hearings that some Republicans seemed to be guilty of the same thing: painting Judge Sotomayor as an activist judge because they found her rulings not to their liking.


The other Democratic senators who voted for Judge Sotomayor were Dianne Feinstein of California, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Edward T. Kaufman of Delaware and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, until recently a Republican.


The remaining Republicans who voted “no” were Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas.


Judge Sotomayor seems likely to be confirmed by a wider margin than the man she would supplant as the high court’s most junior member, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who was selected by former President George W. Bush. Justice Alito was approved by 58 to 42 in early 2006, with only four Democrats voting for him.


Chief Justice Roberts was confirmed by 78 to 22 in the fall of 2005, with half the Senate’s Democrats joining all the chamber’s Republicans in support.


Photobucket      The WeatherPixie 

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Tue, 07-28-2009 - 3:39pm

Caught between a rock and a hard place. If Republicans don't pander to their base (and I mean that in the lowest sense of the word), then they won't get re-elected. But if they alienate Hispanics, then they lose a growing demographic with considerable electoral clout. Poor them.

I thought it was interesting watching the Republican posturing and angst over "liberal" and "pro-government" and "anti-constitutional erosion of individual rights" coming from a passel of white male conservative ideologues in high public office. If they're so anti-government then they really should get the you-know-what outta there. Where were they when BushCo's power grabs and encroachments on civil rights were taking place? Now some of them are yammering about Constitutional protections. What a lot of hypocrisy. Makes about as much sense as similar yowls about "activist judges". It's not activism to which they object, it's activism which acts against their ideological beliefs, which they fear and decry.

Ms Sotomayor earned my respect for not succumbing to the baiting to which they subjected her regarding her temperament as a judge. Calmly and coolly she responded and gave them nothing with which to trap her. A wise Latina, indeed.

Jabberwocka

Community Leader
Registered: 04-05-2002
Tue, 07-28-2009 - 6:26pm

I don't know about the Hispanic base but the Republican politicans should worry about women, too.






iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Wed, 07-29-2009 - 11:08am

"It's not activism to which they object, it's activism which acts against their ideological beliefs, which they fear and decry."


So true!

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Wed, 07-29-2009 - 11:21am

Men are go-getters, aggressive & women are b******.


>"Which explains in part why the same Republican men who can't quite bring themselves to accept Sotomayor still swoon over their party's last vice presidential nominee. Extrapolate at your own whim -- and risk."<


Aside from politics maybe they feel protective of Palin but Sotomayor doesn't elicit that response.

Photobucket

 


Photobucket&nbs