by David G. Savage and Mark Silva
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, poised to become the first Hispanic member of the U.S. Supreme Court, won the support of the Senate Judiciary Committee today in a lopsided vote cast largely along party lines for President Barack Obama's first nominee for the nation's highest court.
The committee voted 13-6 to send its recommendation to the full Senate, which is expected to confirm Sotomayor's appointment next week.
With all of the committee's Democrats supporting Sotomayor, Sen. Russell Feingold of Wisconsin called the president's nominee "a thoughtful, careful and intelligent judge'' with "a perspective that the court sorely needs... Not only will Judge Sotomayor be the first Latina to serve on the court, and the third woman, but also the first with experience as a trial judge.''
With six of the Judiciary Committee's seven Republicans opposing Sotomayor's confirmation, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said he had found "too many controversies and too many unresolved conflicts'' in Sotomayor's long record as a federal judge in New York.
Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa also said that Sotomayor's testimony before the Judiciary Committee had left him "with more questions than answers... I am not sure that Judge Sotomayor is capable of wearing the judicial blindfold,'' he said. "Unfortunately, I'm not convinced that Judge Sotomayor will be able to set aside her personal preferences and prejudices.''
The Democratic-controlled committee voted overwhelmingly to forward Sotomayor's nomination to the full, Democratic-run Senate, which is expected to confirm her with the support of several Republicans on the Senate floor.
The Senate is expected to set a debate and a final vote for next week.
If confirmed, Sotomayor is unlikely to change the ideological balance of the high court, since she will replace moderately liberal Justice David H. Souter.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, the sole Republican on the Judiciary Committee who supported the new president's first nominee to the high court today, has complained that her record is "left of center.'' Yet Graham also maintained that a president deserves deference on well-qualified candidates.
"I didn't feel good about the election, but we lost,'' said Graham (R-S.C.), who supported Republican Sen. John McCain in the presidential election.
"I feel good about Judge Sotomayor,'' Graham told the Judiciary Committee today. "What she will do as a judge I think will be based on what she thinks is right,'' he said, speaking of her record on the federal bench. "I haven't seen this activism that we should all dread and reject.''
He has noted, however, that then-Sen. Barack Obama and most of his Democratic colleagues had not followed that principle with President George W. Bush's two Supreme Court nominees.
In 2006, when Republicans held a slim majority, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.'s nomination was passed out of the Judiciary Committee on a 10-8 vote. He was confirmed by the Senate on a 58-42 vote, with only four Democrats in favor.
In 2005, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. had won a 13-5 vote from the committee, with only three of eight Democrats supporting him. He was confirmed in the Senate by a 78-22 margin, with half the Democrats voting for him and half against. Obama voted against Roberts and Alito.
Two veteran Republicans -- Grassley and Hatch -- said their votes against Sotomayor represented their first "no" votes for a Supreme Court nominee, and they pointed to changed standards in the Senate.
"I think it's a whole new ballgame, a lot different than I approached it with [Justice Ruth Bader] Ginsburg and [Justice Stephen G.] Breyer," Grassley said in a recent interview. He was referring to President Clinton's two Supreme Court picks who were confirmed by 96-3 and 87-9 margins, respectively.
As expected, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the panel's ranking Republican, voted against Sotomayor. He was her sharpest questioner during her confirmation hearings. Despite Sotomayor's pledge to closely follow the law, Sessions said, he believed she would not "resist the siren call of judicial activism."
The National Rifle Assn. and the anti-abortion group Americans United for Life have urged senators to vote "no" on Sotomayor. Grassley cited his concerns about Sotomayor's support for Second Amendment rights today.
Prior to this decade, Supreme Court justices who won confirmation usually had the backing of most of the Senate. Justices John Paul Stevens, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy all won confirmation by unanimous votes.
Sotomayor would replace retired Justice David H. Souter, who was confirmed by a 90-9 vote in 1990.
The one notable exception among the veteran members of the high court was Justice Clarence Thomas, who was confirmed by a 52-48 vote in 1991.
Comments
"Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said he had found "too many controversies and too many unresolved conflicts'' in Sotomayor's long record as a federal judge in New York."
Given the lewd details Orrin Hatch fixated on during the Anita Hill hearings, his refusal to support Sotomayor is truly no loss.
Posted by: Diane | July 28, 2009 12:34 PM
See, the media makes racial comment out of everything. Its not just a woman. Its an Hispanic Woman.
Posted by: ryder | July 28, 2009 1:07 PM
They're worried about her bias? Would they rather a judge who hasn't said a single word on the bench for decades? Or is bias ok as long as it matches theirs... ie. Scalia, Alito, Roberts...
Whatever. I hate politics.
Posted by: Liam Strain | July 28, 2009 1:43 PM
It's interesting to note that every vote against her was from a white male. The supremacy that the white male has had over this nation is crumbling around their ears, and some keep grasping. desperately trying to hold on., to turn back the tide of history, to keep the white male in the privledged, overly empowered position they have held far too long.
A black man in the White House, a Latina on the Suprme Court, more nails in the coffin of the rotting corpse that is white male supremacy.
Posted by: Non-white | July 28, 2009 2:07 PM
Don't hate politics, change politics. You don't like the representatives that are supposed to represent you, but instead represent big business, big insurance or big financial houses, than fire them. Vote them out of office, vote for those that have proven they are interested in all of the citizens of this country, not those that are in allegiance with Big Business !! That is how our country was stolen from us, by the bought-and payed-for politicians and it will stay that way until we are fed up with this hypocrisy and greed ! Let your representatives now, it is no longer, business-as-usual, not since President Obama and Vice-President Biden took Office !! You can take that to the bank, the bank those lousy Republicans almost destroyed.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | July 28, 2009 2:11 PM
Hatch (R-UT) is a low dog. His vote is not even needed. Sotomayor will be confirmed to be the next Supreme Court justice.
Posted by: Doug R. | July 28, 2009 2:24 PM
This probably means no double-digit GOP votes for Sotomayor in the full Senate. Nice bipartisanship…
http://www.political-buzz.com
Posted by: matt | July 28, 2009 2:36 PM
As much as elected Republicans may have tried to hide their bigoted attacks on Sotomayor by letting other Wingnuts fling the mud (Gingrich, Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan, Lou Dobbs etc), that distinction isn't going to be made by Latinos watching on the sidelines. They know who pulls the strings in the modern GOP, and the longer they drag this out, and the nastier they behave, the more they'll lose a demographic that is projected to be 30 percent of the American population in 2050.
Without young voters or Latinos, the GOP can't win. They've done a fantastic job of alienating the former with their opposition to equality, and they're about to finish off the latter courtesy of the Sotomayor confirmation hearings.
Considering that the Census Bureau expects the nation to be only 46 percent non-Hispanic, single-race white in 2050, the GOP's continued shoddy treatment of people who don't look like "President" Newt or Boss Limbaugh is only solidifying their journey toward fringe status.
Posted by: Kathy | July 28, 2009 2:36 PM
Look at it this way: Liberals won't be able to cry racism anymore, now that they have a racist of their own on the Supreme Court. Now all the scuzzy white supremacists will feel justified in being racist all along. If you fight fire with fire, you get, well, more fire.
Posted by: Heather Czerniak | July 28, 2009 2:37 PM
Breaking News!: Orrin Hatch is a hypocrite......wait did I say breaking? I meant politics as ususal for the GOP, where consistency means absolutely nothing.
Acually it's more than politics/racism as usual for the Rethugs.
It shows exactly how far to the rightwing lunatic fringe the Rethugs have moved as a party, and how utterly helpless they are in front of their 20% hardcore nutjob base.
Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) voted no on Sotomayor, marking the first time EVER either had opposed a nominee for the Supreme Court.
Posted by: Mongo | July 28, 2009 4:06 PM
The despicable display of partisanship the Republicans are visiting on our legislative branch, particularly, the Senate, is the reason why they are quitting their elective office, prematurely, or being blasted in the papers for their reprehensible conduct, concerning their marriage vows. They have no care for what is happening to Americans, they are too busy stuffing their pockets or skulking around, avoiding the spotlight, that would show their less than honorable behavior. Every day, 14,000 Americans are losing their healthcare coverage and they, the Republicans, are dragging their feet, if not, out right hostile toward helping these unfortunate Americans. What is wrong with these delinquent Americans, that are supposed to be our leaders? Where are they !!? Would some one remind them of their oath of Office !!? They are supposed to be helping America, not hindering her !!?
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, IL | July 28, 2009 4:33 PM
"Look at it this way: Liberals won't be able to cry racism anymore, now that they have a racist of their own on the Supreme Court. Now all the scuzzy white supremacists will feel justified in being racist all along."
The "scuzzy white supremacists" are not only those who hide behind sheets, but also those who hide behind their own hypocrisy.
Posted by: Diane | July 28, 2009 6:55 PM
I can only hope there will be opportunity to convey onto this turncoat all of the karma he richly deserves. Sooner rather than later.
runescape items
Posted by: runescape gold | July 29, 2009 4:35 AM