President Barack Obama introducing federal Judge Sonia Sotomayor, his nominee for the Supreme Court, today in the East Room of the White House. (Photo by Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP)
by Mark Silva and updated.
The White House is seeking swift Senate confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, as Republican congressional leaders suggest they may be in no rush.
While critics challenge what they view as the "judicial activism'' which Sotomayor has demonstrated on the federal bench for two decades, Republican congressional leaders today are taking a more cautious approach to the Democratic president's first Supreme Court nominee, positioned to become the first Hispanic and only the third woman on the nation's highest court.
Yet the GOP also is signaling that any confirmation of Obama's candidate for the court may not follow as swiftly as the president hopes, with the White House seeking confirmation of the federal judge from New York before the Senate's August recess and in time for the start of the court's fall term in October.
"'Senate Republicans will treat Judge Sotomayor fairly,'' Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said today. "But we will thoroughly examine her record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law even-handedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences.
"Our Democratic colleagues have often remarked that the Senate is not a 'rubber stamp.''' McConnell said. "Accordingly, we trust they will ensure there is adequate time to prepare for this nomination, and a full and fair opportunity to question the nominee and debate her qualifications."
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, spoke today of his vote against Sotomayor in 1998 in her confirmation for the apellate court in Manhattan.
"We felt like...she had a history of activism,'' Sessions said, speaking on FOX News Channel's Happening Now. "She is entitled to a full and fair new evaluation... We'll give her time to respond... The president has said he wants to nominate someone who will use empathy...its certainly not law, it's not judicial.
"The court could be at the fork in the road,'' Sessions said. "President Obama has set forth a new standard for nominees."
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) voiced a similar position, though it is the Senate which confirms judicial appointments:
"Each nominee to the Supreme Court must undergo a rigorous examination, and Judge Sotomayor's record must be scrutinized thoroughly to ensure that the next Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court is one with a consistent record of applying the law equally and impartially to all, rather than a record of judicial activism and legislating from the bench. She deserves a fair hearing on her qualifications for the court and her record on interpreting the Constitution as it is written."
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, asked this afternoon if the president might be "flexible'' in the time-frame for Sotomayor's confirmation, said that history suggests there is plenty of time.
"I think the average is about 72 days,'' Gibbs said of Supreme Court confirmations, pointing to that time frame from nomination to confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts Jr.
"There are currently 74 days between now and target adjournment'' of the Senate, Gibbs said today. "I think the president would say there is ample time....
"This is a judge that is not unfamiliar to the United States Senate, having been through the confirmation process twice,'' he said of Sotomayor, elevated to the Second Court of Appeals by President Bill Clinton in 1998 after her appointment as a federal District Court judge by President George H.W. Bush in 1991.
"The president believes there is ample time to get a fair and honest hearing,'' Gibbs said. "At the same time, the president is eager to have a justice in place before the Senate goes on recess to get that person ready to do the court's work.... ultimately ready to hit the ground running when the court starts in October.''
Comments
I'm sure the Repuglican party leadership will use the Sotomayor nomination to raise a boatload of cash. Their direct mailers will scare the money right out of the wallets of the right-wing minions.
Love to see the Republican party wringing their hands over why they aren't in the majority while once again alienating the Latino vote by attacking a Latina who is eminently qualified for this position.
Posted by: Disillusioned Dem Teresa | May 26, 2009 4:14 PM
Here's just one of the many scary remarks Judge Sotomayor has made (from the NY Times):
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,"
Can you imagine the outcry if a "white male" judge claimed that a white male would reach better conclusions than a "Latina woman?" They'd label that white male a "racist"--and they'd be correct.
Posted by: Speaking Truth to Power | May 26, 2009 4:34 PM
Let the games begin!
Let's see Sessions and the party of "NO" try and torpedo this one. As if they care about women, Latinos, Blacks, Asians, moderates and independents etc. For the most part, those groups are already gone for good from the GOPer ranks. Todays GOP represents what's left of their base - angry old rich white guys.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/sessions-colleague-i-thought-id-be-fired-if-i-objected-to-being-called-boy.php
Posted by: Leonard Cohen afterworld | May 26, 2009 4:38 PM
Do these Republicans think we all were born yesterday? Does anyone think they will not do everything in their power to stop her nomination? They are not out to do what is best for this country and the people who live here. They are out to get re-elected, whatever it takes, bowing to whomever they have to pander to.
Posted by: lochnessmonster | May 26, 2009 5:11 PM
The party (Republican) who elected a President (Bush) who nominated Harriet Miers can have a nice hot cup of GET LOST! Sotomayor is clearly qualified and I anticipate that she will sail through confirmation.
There is no one sitting on that bench who operates outside of a personal context, because that would be impossible. Sotomayor would likely be operating outside of the white, male, protestant "neutral" context which is the GOP's real problem and they know it.
As long as there is a Republican Party (at least the 2009 incarnation), there will be a push for fear, racism, and hatred in order to keep the base in line.
But that base is shrinking by the day, and they keep pushing more people out of their party.
They are reducing the Republican Party to a demi-glace of insanity and ignorance.
Posted by: Speaking Truth to Power - Teresa | May 26, 2009 5:16 PM
Rush Limbaugh once said elections matter. This is especially true of Supreme Court nominees. In this instance he was right. The democrats are in controal and as long as they are we will be seeing more progressive nominees.
Posted by: Brandon | May 26, 2009 5:49 PM
I hope she is an liberal activist judge. We need more of those to counter the conservative activist judges.
Posted by: C.Morris | May 26, 2009 8:32 PM
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said today. "But we will thoroughly examine her record to ensure she understands that the role of a jurist in our democracy is to apply the law even-handedly, despite their own feelings or personal or political preferences."
Well, gee Mitch, maybe you should remind Scalia and Thomas of that. They don't do anything that's not part of their own personal, ideological agenda.
Being that she was first nominated by GHW Bush, her confirmation will more than likely go pretty smoothly.
Posted by: David J | May 27, 2009 8:37 AM
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,"
Can you imagine the outcry if a "white male" judge claimed that a white male would reach better conclusions than a "Latina woman?" They'd label that white male a "racist"--and they'd be correct.
Posted by: Speaking Truth to Power | May 26, 2009 4:34 PM
Are you stupid or just dont understand the English language?
What part of ''A white male who HASNT lived that life'' do you not understand??? Explain to me what would a white male know about living as a latino woman?? Nothing! Thats exactly what she is referring too. Typical of you right wing NUTS to twist the words and meanings of a statement made by someone you disagree with. And you sonder why you lost the elections???
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | May 27, 2009 8:45 AM