(Credit: Paul J. Richards/AFP/Getty Images)
Judge Sonia Sotomayor is sworn in with the Judicial Oath in the East Conference room of the Supreme Court this morning by Chief Justice John Roberts as her mother Celina holds the Bible and her brother Juan Luis looks on.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has used debate over Sonia Sotomayor to argue that Democratic opposition to Bush administration judicial nominees reduced the deference GOP senators are now obliged to give a president's judicial picks, freeing them to oppose nominees on philosophical grounds.
Asked after Sotomayor's confirmation Thursday if he felt his argument caught on with GOP colleagues, who voted 31-9 against Sotomayor's confirmation, McConnell said he was pleased with the way his caucus approached the vote.
"This was an issue upon which every senator tries establishing their own criteria for judging a nominee. And it's kind of shifted over the years from a period during which qualifications alone -- where'd you go to school, how long have you practiced and that sort of thing -- was viewed by the vast majority senators as the standard," McConnell said. "It led to nominees becoming something of a political football."
"I am proud of how the Republican conference handled this nomination respectfully, thoughtfully. I think we restored to some degree the reputation of the Senate in dealing with nominees, which had been significantly damaged, in my view, by the treatment of some of our nominees by the other side. Hopefully we'll continue to achieve a level of civility and respect in dealing with nominees in the future."
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., reacts passionately to a question about President Obama's next Supreme Court nominee as Judiciary member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., looks on. (Credit: Amy Harder)
The Senate had barely finished its roll call vote on Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation before reporters started asking about President Obama's next nominee to the Supreme Court. When Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy was asked during a press conference whether he would advise Obama to nominate anyone he wants since Republicans have signaled they will vote against anyone he picks, the Vermont Democrat slammed his fists down on the podium in response.
"I would advise the president do exactly -- exactly -- what he did this time: Pick the most qualified person possible and nominate them," Leahy said in a press conference just minutes after the Senate voted 68-31 to confirm Sotomayor. "That's what he did, and that's what he will do with another vacancy." Leahy was accompanied by nine of his Democratic colleagues, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
The White House was a bit more restrained in its response. In the daily briefing today ahead of the vote, press secretary Robert Gibbs said that he didn't "have any news to report on what happens if there is another vacancy."
In a statement announcing his support for Sonia Sotomayor, Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, emphasized that the Second Amendment is important to his constituents, but that he is "convinced she will not be an activist justice." He added, "I believe she will continue her practice of upholding the law and protecting our constitutional rights without bringing personal bias to her decisions."
Begich had been targeted by conservative interest groups as a potentially vulnerable red state Democrat, and fellow Alaskan Lisa Murkowski, a Republican, said he has likely been facing the same pressure from his constituents as she has on the issue.
Begich, who was elected last year, is known as being pro-gun. His "yea" vote is another sign of the National Rifle Association's diminished influence over this nomination, even after it announced its intent to score the vote.
With Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio announcing this afternoon that he will vote in favor of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation, all Republican votes are accounted for: Nine will vote yes, and 31 will vote no.
The White House may tout this as a "bipartisan" victory, but conservative interest groups also see it as a victory for them. Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice, said the goal was to break 30 no votes, and that's just what happened Wednesday night when Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska announced her intent to oppose Sotomayor -- the last Republican to do so.
In his remarks today, Voinovich continued a pattern among Republicans: denouncing the ideological considerations that Barack Obama cited in voting against George W. Bush's Supreme Court nominees as a senator, yet still expressing support for Sotomayor. "If I applied President Obama's standard, I would not be voting for Judge Sotomayor, his nominee," Voinovich said. "The president was wrong. His standard makes the whole nominations process an exercise in partisan politics."
Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, a Democrat up for re-election in a conservative state, also announced this morning that she intends to vote yes. In her speech, Lincoln said that she has "heard from a number of Arkansans, including those in our legal community, who have expressed strong support for Judge Sotomayor, emphasizing her unique background, impressive resume and solid judicial record." Conservative interest groups saw Lincoln as potentially vulnerable on Second Amendment issues, but that didn't seem to resonate with her: She didn't mention the issue once in her speech.
The final vote could be 68-31 if all remaining Democrats vote yes (except the ailing Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts). Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who has been ill, is expected to attend, said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. The office of Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., who has been hospitalized with a broken leg, said she will be voting today.
Updated at 11:39 a.m. on Aug. 6.
Democrat Mark Begich is one of the few senators who haven't announced their votes on Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation. His fellow Alaskan, Lisa Murkowski, says the wait can't be pleasant.
Murkowski, a Republican, announced on the Senate floor Wednesday that her constituents' "overwhelming concern" on their right to bear arms compelled her to vote no. Begich, a newly elected Democrat in a conservative state, could be facing even more pressure, she noted later in an interview with NationalJournal.com.
Curt Levey, executive director of the conservative Committee for Justice, said voting against confirmation "would be a great way to show that he is not another Eastern liberal, that he hasn't been captured by Eastern liberals." His organization has been running ads in Alaska targeting both senators. In addition, the National Rifle Association is scoring senators based on their confirmation votes.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, a Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told NationalJournal.com that it's possible a red state Democrat could vote no because of Second Amendment issues. "I think it's possible, and I think it would be a very strong signal about how politicized this process has become," Whitehouse said. Republicans want Sotomayor "to be an advocate for the expansion of the Second Amendment," he said. He added that the "fact that the NRA is involved pressing it only adds an exclamation point to it."
Begich's office told the Anchorage Daily News that he likely won't announce his vote until the official vote today, slated for 3 p.m. So, could he be the lone Democrat voting against Sotomayor's nomination? "That I don't know," Murkowski told NationalJournal.com. "... But if I have been receiving this kind of input from folks back home, I'm sure he has as well."
UPDATE: The original version of this report listed Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., as undecided. She announced she would vote for Sotomayor's confirmation minutes after this report was posted.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., addresses a crowd assembled outside the Capitol Building. (Credit: Amy Harder)
Democratic senators and leaders of Hispanic organizations sent a message to Republicans today: Their votes on Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation will matter.
"To say that you cannot vote for this qualified Latina to be on the United States Supreme Court sends a message to us as a community that we will not forget," said Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., prompting the crowd -- assembled as part of a rally hosted by Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md. -- to erupt in cheers.
Menendez continued: "We know there are enough senators, including some of our Republican colleagues, who have set aside the pressures -- the pressures of the [National Rifle Association], the pressures of their leadership -- to join us."
Janet Murguia, president and CEO of the National Council of La Raza, took to the podium and touted the historical nature of this nomination. She reiterated the message Menendez sent to the almost 30 Republicans who are lining up against Sotomayor's nomination: "We will remember this," Murguia said. "This vote will matter."
Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Charles Schumer of New York and Cardin took part in the rally as well. While Democrats have held numerous press conferences touting the nominee, this is one of the first rallies -- if not the first -- held in honor of Sotomayor. A crowd of 100 or more gathered in Upper Senate Park, just off New Jersey Avenue. Many of the attendees, holding signs and cheering throughout the rally, were representing liberal interest groups like the Service Employees International Union and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
During the rally, Republicans were taking to the floor inside the Capitol Building explaining why they were voting against Sotomayor. Sens. Pat Roberts of Kansas, Roger Wicker of Mississippi and John Cornyn of Texas were among the anti-Sotomayor speakers.
Sen. Christopher (Kit) Bond of Missouri also spoke and announced he will vote "yes", joining six other GOP lawmakers who have already pledged to do so. "I could easily say, as Senator [Barack] Obama said, that I disagree with a nominee's judicial approach and that allows me to oppose the nominee of a different party," Bond said on the floor. "Luckily for President Obama, I do not agree with Senator Obama.... I agree that Judge Sotomayor has proven herself a well-qualified jurist."
Sen. Christopher (Kit) Bond of Missouri today became the seventh Republican to announce he will vote to confirm Sonia Sotomayor.
Deploring the partisanship that has engulfed recent Supreme Court nominations, Bond noted he has voted to confirm both conservative and liberal nominees. "I hope those votes do not reflect a time that has slipped away, when partisanship did not infect every facet of our political life," he said in a floor speech. While disagreeing with several of Sotomayor's decisions, especially those involving New Haven, Conn., firefighters and gun rights, "I do agree that Judge Sotomayor has proven herself a well-qualified jurist." Bond said if he and Republicans want more conservative jurists "the best way to ensure that we have conservative judges on the bench is to work to see that we elect presidents who will nominate them."
Olympia Snowe said today that her Republican colleagues' pending "no" votes on Sonia Sotomayor raise "a serious concern" about alienating their Hispanic constituencies. The Maine moderate was among the first GOP lawmakers to say she would vote yes, joining Mel Martinez of Florida and Richard Lugar of Indiana on July 17.
Snowe told reporters that voting for Sotomayor "would have certainly been an avenue for appealing to the Hispanic community, where we did poorly in the last election. I think we can ill afford to lose their support in the future when we're attempting to rebuild the Republican Party nationally," she said.
So far, 28 Republicans have announced they will vote against Sotomayor's confirmation. Many have recognized the historic nature of the high court's first Hispanic nominee even as they explained why they would not vote for her.
Keep tabs on which senators have committed to yes or no votes with NationalJournal.com's Vote Tracker.
The Senate began debate this afternoon on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, with Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., saying he wants to make the confirmation vote the last one senators take before recessing.
Reid said he plans to hold votes on expansion of the "cash for clunkers" program and on a bill to promote travel to the United States, before ending the summer work session with the Sotomayor vote.
Democrats worked Tuesday to complete unanimous consent agreements on those two bills, though it is uncertain if there will be time for the travel promotion measure.
Sotomayor's confirmation will most likely occur Thursday, Senate leadership aides, though Friday is possible. Based on senators' announcements, she will likely get votes from all Democrats and from six to 10 Republicans.
With formerly undecided Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and John McCain, R-Ariz., announcing today that they intend to vote yes and no, respectively, on Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation, a vote close to the party line is becoming increasingly likely.
But don't tell the White House, where the buzzword "bipartisan" has adhered to Sotomayor's confirmation, seemingly out of habit. Press secretary Robert Gibbs even cited Sotomayor's nomination as an example of bipartisanship on Friday.
Asked in a press briefing about President Obama's reliance on Democrats in office, Gibbs reeled off some examples of bipartisanship in the capital -- beginning with the Supreme Court nominee. "Well, I mean, I think if you look at -- I think you've seen Republicans come out for Judge Sotomayor," he said.
During another briefing on Thursday, Gibbs took questions directly on the small amount of GOP support. His word choice then was less positive and more dismissive, instead focusing on her judicial experience.
"Without getting into whether or not we're disappointed, I think the president believes, rightly, as many have said, Democrat and Republican, that this is a judge with a tremendous amount of legal experience as a prosecutor, as a judge on two different levels of federal court; somebody who has that very background that is eminently qualified to serve as a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court and hopes that she's evaluated that way," Gibbs said.
Only six out of the Senate's 40 Republicans have said they will vote for Sotomayor. If all the rest vote no and all Democrats vote yes, the final tally would be 64-34 (ailing Democratic Sens. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Robert Byrd of West Virginia aren't expected to vote).
Even if a few Democrats vote no or another Republican or two vote yes, this is shaping up to be a second straight mostly party-line Supreme Court vote, following Samuel Alito's 58-42 confirmation in 2006. Only four Democrats voted for President George W. Bush's nominee; one Republican voted against him.
Keep tabs on which senators have committed to yes or no votes with NationalJournal.com's Vote Tracker.
With the House long gone, the Senate will turn its attention this week to passing one more spending bill, replenishing the popular Cash for Clunkers program and confirming Sonia Sotomayor, all with the aim to leave town Friday until after Labor Day.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can continue reading the story here.
With a Senate Finance Committee agreement on a health care overhaul plan unlikely before the Senate recesses Aug. 7, Democrats will leave town with next week's expected confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor as their main July achievement.
Sotomayor will likely be confirmed in a vote late next week. Republicans and Democrats have yet to agree on how much floor time will be needed to debate her nomination. Senate Republicans, citing debate on past nominees to the top court, have urged four days of debate, but Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., in acerbic comments several times this week, has said two days is enough.
Lamar Alexander of Tennessee became the sixth Republican senator to announce he will vote in favor of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation, in floor remarks this morning.
"Even though Judge Sotomayor's political and judicial philosophy may be different than mine, especially regarding Second Amendment rights, I will vote to confirm her because she is well qualified by experience, temperament, character and intellect to serve as an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court," said Alexander.
Alexander joins Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and moderate Sens. Richard Lugar of Indiana, Mel Martinez of Florida, and Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine in pledging to vote in favor of President Obama's nominee. Keep track of which senators vote yes or no with NationalJournal.com's Vote Tracker.
Alexander did not neglect to take a shot at the president and Senate Democrats even as he approved their nominee.
"In 2005, I said on this floor that it was wrong for then-Senator Obama and half the Democratic senators to vote against John Roberts -- a superbly qualified nominee -- solely because they disagreed with what Senator Obama described as Roberts' 'overarching political philosophy' and his 'work in the White House and the Solicitor General's office' that 'consistently sided' with 'the strong in opposition to the weak,'" Alexander said. "Today, it would be equally wrong for me to vote against Judge Sotomayor solely because she is not 'on my side' on some issues."
Obama's votes against Roberts and Samuel Alito have been cited by Republicans voting for and against Sotomayor. Alexander and Graham have used them to decry the politicization of the confirmation process and set themselves apart from the president in this regard. Numerous other GOP senators, on the other hand, have cited them as a precedent for voting against confirmation of a nominee whose judicial philosophy they don't agree with, regardless of qualifications.
Senate Republicans are set to vote overwhelmingly against Sonia Sotomayor next week, and they appear to believe there is little price to pay politically, despite Democratic warnings of a backlash from Hispanic voters.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., predicted Wednesday that Sotomayor will get just "a handful" of GOP votes and warned Republicans will be treated "the same way as they got treated as a result of how they handled immigration."
But the office of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who has led GOP opposition to Sotomayor, shot back later, pointing to a recent Gallup Poll that shows the Sotomayor nomination and GOP opposition having no impact so far on the views of Hispanic voters. The poll notes a drop in Hispanics' support for Obama that "comes the week after the confirmation hearings of Hispanic Judge Sonia Sotomayor, something one might predict would earn Obama credit among Hispanic Americans."
GOP aides and political strategists echo this view. "Ultimately, this comes down to the candidates," said a Republican official familiar with GOP Senate campaigns. The official dismissed the political impact of a Sotomayor vote at the state and local levels, calling the idea "absurd."
McConnell's office also pointed to past statements by Reid, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., decrying Republican attacks on Democrats for opposing female and Hispanic GOP nominees.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., were joined by nearly 20 progressive interest groups on Capitol Hill today to urge senators to, as Reid said, "put politics aside" and vote to confirm Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. (Credit: Amy Harder)
Harry Reid is sick and tired of hearing about Sonia Sotomayor's "wise Latina woman" remark and her ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano.
"How many times do we have to listen to the same speeches on the same brief statements and on the same case?" the Senate majority leader rhetorically asked during a press conference today on Capitol Hill.
Reid said the full Senate vote on Sotomayor's Supreme Court nomination will be one of the last things taken up before the summer recess begins on Aug. 7, reiterating what Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said Tuesday. Hill staffers and others familiar with the process are predicting Aug. 6. Reid added that he is working with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to come up with a time line.
The Nevada Democrat said that if all 40 Republicans want to spend an hour talking about the nomination, they can, though he was visibly exasperated by the prospect. "I'm going to make sure that senators can talk about that speech another 30 or 40 times, or maybe about that case another 50 or 60 times," Reid said.
He said it would be "great" to get 20 Republicans but conceded it was doubtful. Based on the latest count in NationalJournal.com's Vote Tracker, it won't happen -- 23 of the chamber's 40 Republicans are on record saying they won't vote for Sotomayor.
In response to a question about whether the National Rifle Association's decision to score the confirmation vote concerns him regarding some senators' votes, Reid replied: "It personally doesn't persuade me; I am going to vote for this very qualified woman."
He also cautioned Republicans that voting against Sotomayor could hurt them with Hispanics. "Voting against this good woman is going to treat them about the same way as they got treated as a result of how they handled immigration," Reid said.
Leahy was also present at the conference, which was in coordination with nearly 20 progressive interest groups. Leaders from the organizations surrounded the two senators throughout the presser. A few of the representatives -- including Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and Lillian Rodriguez-Lopez, president of the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda -- also spoke.
Lindsey Graham knows how it feels to be a Democrat. At least, a certain kind.
Before voting in favor of President Obama's first Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, in the Senate Judiciary Committee's executive meeting this morning, Graham sought to explain why he chose to break from his fellow Republicans on the committee.
Glancing to his colleagues on either side of him, the South Carolinian said: "To my colleagues who voted no, I understand, I completely understand."
But then he looked across the table at the Democrats and continued: "To my colleagues who voted for Justice [John] Roberts, I'm better understanding what you went through."
Singling out Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Wisconsin Democrats Russell Feingold and Herb Kohl, who all voted in favor of Roberts' confirmation in 2005, Graham said, "You decided to vote for a man you would not have chosen. I am deciding to vote for a woman that I would not have chosen."
Graham also took a subtle jab at fellow Republican Charles Grassley. The Iowa senator had said several minutes earlier that he regretted his vote to confirm David Souter in 1990, that he had doubts about President George H.W. Bush's nominee because of his judicial philosophy and comments he'd made. Grassley voted against Sotomayor's confirmation, citing similar concerns.
"To my good friend Senator Grassley," Graham said, Sotomayor "can be no worse than Souter from our point of view, so there is not going to be a major shift in the balance of power here."
Updated at 4:33 p.m. on July 28.
Wisconsin's two Democratic senators denounced the politicization of Supreme Court nominations during the Senate Judiciary Committee's executive business meeting on Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation vote today.
"I have no reservations about my support for Judge Sotomayor, but I share concerns expressed by many Americans and legal commentators about our committee's ability to have substantive and candid conversations about our nominees," Herb Kohl said in Hart 216.
He said it has become a "familiar pattern" -- regardless of who is in the White House -- for president's nominees to dodge questions on past Supreme Court decisions and how they might handle "close calls" if they're confirmed. "It's understandable that nominees don't want to risk their confirmation that might provoke potential opponents, but it is reasonable for us to ask them to speak more openly," Kohl said.
Russell Feingold said that the hearings "have become little more than theater" and bemoaned "a nominations process that I think fails to educate the Senate or the public about the views of potential Justices on the Supreme Court."
Kohl proposed a bipartisan committee made up of judiciary panel members, American Bar Association members, other legal experts and members of the media who have covered SCOTUS nominations to evaluate what type of issues and cases nominees should be expected to answer in the confirmation process.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., told reporters after this morning's meeting that the Senate will likely take up Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation vote as one of its final agenda items before the August recess, which is slated to start Aug. 7.
After nearly two hours of wading through the litany of senators' concerns about and praise of Sonia Sotomayor, the Senate Judiciary Committee officially voted 13-6 this morning in favor of President Obama's first nominee to the Supreme Court.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote 13-6 this morning in favor of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court, with all Democrats and South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham voting "yea." The nomination will then go to the full Senate, which will likely consider it next week.
Tom Coburn, the last Republican on the committee to announce his vote, will join most of his GOP colleagues in opposing her. The Oklahoman on Monday cited many of the same concerns as other Republicans, including her position in the Second Amendment case Maloney v. Cuomo and the way she explained her much-discussed comments from the past, notably her "wise Latina woman" remark. His "nay" vote isn't surprising, considering his critical questioning and focus on similar core GOP issues during the hearing.
The vote is taking place in Hart 216, the same room where the panel held Sotomayor's confirmation hearings. Reporters and Senate staffers started filing in nearly a hour before the 10 a.m. start time. The two most junior members of the panel -- Minnesota Democrat Al Franken and Coburn -- were the first to arrive. Franken was nearly 15 minutes early, while Coburn arrived a few minutes before 10. About 20 minutes into Tuesday's meeting, the only two senators not present were Democrats Charles Schumer of New York and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Specter was a late arriver at the hearings, as well.
The press gallery's tables are shorter, the camera crews fewer and the emotion lighter than the confirmation hearings, but the room is still full, with several people standing in the back.
Updated at 12:12 p.m. on Aug. 6 to add Voinovich for Sotomayor.
Between now and when the full Senate votes on Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court, this blog is tracking which senators officially announce whether they will vote "yea" or "nay." We are compiling the list according to statements only, not general sentiments.
Here's the running tally:
Total for: 38
Total against: 31
Republicans for: 9
Republicans against: 31
Democrats for: 29
Democrats against: 0
Final Judiciary Committee vote: 13-6
After the jump, see a chronological list of which senators have said how they're going to vote along with a brief excerpt from their remarks when available.
Continue reading Tracking The Vote: Who's For And Against.
Sonia Sotomayor has probably made her last Capitol Hill visit as a nominee. Thursday's meetings with GOP Sens. Richard Burr of North Carolina, John Barrasso of Wyoming and John Ensign of Nevada are expected to be her final ones, according to the White House.
She has met with a total of 92 senators, including all Democrats except ailing Sens. Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts. The following five GOP lawmakers have not -- and most likely will not -- meet with Sotomayor:
• John McCain, Arizona (has not announced his vote)
• Michael Enzi, Wyoming (has not announced his vote)
• Christopher (Kit) Bond, Missouri (has not announced his vote)
• Richard Lugar, Indiana (announced July 17 he will vote yes)
• Pat Roberts, Kansas (on May 28, became the first senator to announce his intent to vote no)
• James Inhofe, Oklahoma (announced his opposition on June 10 and refused to meet with her)
Enzi spokesman Coy Knobel said in an e-mail that "there is no particular reason" why the senator hasn't met with the nominee: "He will take into consideration all questions and answers and her record before he makes a decision on Sotomayor's nomination."
A White House aide said today that the number of meetings Sotomayor has had with senators is a record, based on the aide's conversations with people who have worked on past nominations. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito both met with more than 80 senators as nominees, according to former Bush officials Jamie Brown and Rachel Brand.
GOP Senate Judiciary Committee members John Cornyn and Orrin Hatch announced today that they intend to vote against Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation, despite what both conceded was a strong resume.
Cornyn acknowledged that the nominee is "an experienced judge with an excellent academic background," that she "has the temperament we expect from members of our highest court," and that "for the most part" her decisions have been "within the mainstream of American jurisprudence."
But, Cornyn said, "many of her public statements reflected a surprisingly radical view of the law" -- a view which she seemed to contradict in her statements before the Committee. "So at the end of the hearings," Cornyn said, "I found myself asking: "Will the real Judge Sotomayor please stand up?"
Cornyn then made an implicit jab at another Republican Judiciary member, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, for his reasoning in deciding to vote in favor of confirmation. "Some have argued that if I am uncertain about what kind of justice she'd be, I should vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor anyway. I disagree," Cornyn said. "Voting to confirm Judge Sotomayor -- despite my doubts -- would certainly be the politically expedient thing to do. But it would not be the right thing to do."
Graham, in his floor speech Wednesday, said he chose to vote "yea" after "looking at her from the most optimistic perspective, understanding I could be wrong..."
As the head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Cornyn is the point man for next year's Senate races and therefore is likely facing pressure from the GOP base. At the same time, though, he hails from a state with a large Hispanic constituency and could endure political heat for this vote. Indeed, his fellow GOP Judiciary member Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., is already facing criticism after announcing his "nay" vote Wednesday -- from a fellow Arizona lawmaker, Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva. "It is disappointing that he dismisses her record, her talent and her extensive experience," Grijalva said in a press release on Wednesday. "Judge Sotomayor brings more federal experience to the court than any justice in the past 100 years."
Hatch's remarks, which were released as an official statement only -- not read on the floor -- were more reserved than Cornyn's. "Arriving at a final decision was particularly difficult because I like and highly respect Judge Sotomayor and, in general, give a great deal of deference to any President's nominee," Hatch said. "The prospect of a woman of Puerto Rican heritage serving on the Supreme Court brought great excitement to me and says a lot about America."
Like Cornyn, Hatch praised the nominee's accomplishments, but said that he believes Sotomayor's "judicial philosophy" is "more important than her stellar resume," and "her statements and record were too much at odds with the principles about the judiciary in which I deeply believe."
"In truth, I wish President Obama had chosen a Hispanic nominee that all Senators could support," Cornyn said. "I believe it would have done a great deal for our great country."
To see how other senators plan to vote, check out our continually updated Vote Tracker.
Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings last week may have topped the news cycle among the mainstream media, but the blogosophere and social media sites were far less impressed.
According to numbers compiled weekly by Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, the hearings didn't make it into the top seven stories among blogs and social media sites, including Twitter. The top seven includes topics that are linked in at least 5 percent of stories on social media sites.
Sotomayor "was such a main part of the dialogue in the mainstream media you would think there would be some pick-up," said Amy Mitchell, deputy director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism. "On the other hand, what folks in social media are drawn to are things that can incite change, impassion them.... Neither of those things really existed in these proceedings."
So, what were bloggers and other social media types focusing on? Sarah Palin, who grabbed a whopping one-third of all linked stories. Meanwhile, Iran dominated the Twitter platform for the fifth week in a row.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce today endorsed Sonia Sotomayor, giving her nearly certain confirmation some mainstream business community credibility. "The Chamber urges members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to vote in favor of reporting Judge Sotomayor's nomination for consideration by the full Senate," the Republican-leaning lobbying group said in a letter released by the White House and Judiciary Committee Democrats. "Based on the Chamber's evaluation of her judicial record, Judge Sotomayor is well-qualified to serve as an Associate Justice of the U.S.," the letter says.
Since it began its endorsement policy in 1987, the Chamber has endorsed the nominations of Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Samuel Alito, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, David Souter and Clarence Thomas.
The National Rifle Association will factor senators' votes on Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation into its "future candidate evaluation," Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and chief lobbyist Chris Cox said in a letter to Senate leadership today.
The letter intensifies the NRA's formal opposition to the nominee and reiterates the organization's concerns with Maloney v. Cuomo, in which an appellate panel that included Sotomayor affirmed a lower court's ruling that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. A statement by the NRA last week and a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee leadership July 7 made similar points.
"We believe any individual who does not agree that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right and who does not respect our God-given right of self-defense should not serve on any court, much less the highest court in the land," Cox and LaPierre wrote in the letter sent today.
With Sotomayor's confirmation seemingly a foregone conclusion, the NRA -- and conservative groups like the Third Branch Conference and Committee for Justice -- are focusing more on something they think they can influence: future judicial nominations. "If several red-state Democrats vote against Sotomayor because of her bad Second Amendment record, it will forever shift the nominations game and you can bet President Obama will be careful not to nominate someone who is hostile to the Second Amendment," said Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice.
Gun rights are a top concern among Republican senators who have announced they will oppose Sotomayor. It was the first specific issue raised in the remarks by Roger Wicker of Mississippi, John Thune of South Dakota and Robert Bennett of Utah. Judiciary Committee member Jon Kyl of Arizona commented on Maloney with a reference to District of Columbia v. Heller, a 2008 Second Amendment case: "If Judge Sotomayor's decision were allowed to stand as precedent, then states will, ironically, be able to do what the federal District of Columbia cannot -- place a de facto prohibition on the ownership of guns and other arms."
Senators who have announced their intent to vote for Sotomayor haven't placed as much emphasis on the issue. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a key GOP Judiciary Committee member, went so far to say Wednesday that Sotomayor may be "more balanced" than retired Justice David Souter when it comes to the Second Amendment. No red-state Democrats who conservative groups have said could face pressure from the NRA, such as Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, have announced how they will vote yet.
Sen. Lindsey Graham announced today that he will vote in favor of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court, while fellow Senate Judiciary Republican Jon Kyl of Arizona said he intends to vote no.
Graham was one of the toughest questioners during Sotomayor's confirmation hearings last week, but he all but endorsed her Thursday, so his official announcement today was not surprising. The South Carolina Republican began his speech on the Senate floor this afternoon by reiterating a point from the hearings: elections have consequences, and President Obama "deserves some deference on my part." He added, "We're talking about one of the most qualified nominees to be selected for the Supreme Court in decades."
For his part, Kyl's opposition could signal that Republicans hailing from states with large Hispanic populations may not be worried about the political aftermath of opposing the country's first Hispanic Supreme Court nominee. The senator took issue with how Sotomayor explained her "wise Latina woman" remark, and other comments, during the hearings. "Her attempt to re-characterize these speeches at the committee hearing strained credulity," Kyl said on the Senate floor today. "... I remain unconvinced that Judge Sotomayor believes judges should set aside biases, including those based on race and gender, and render the law impartially and neutrally."
To see which other senators have officially announced how they're going to vote, check out this blog's continually updated Vote Tracker.
After drawing criticism from a Republican foe for not taking a position on Supreme Court nominee Sonya Sotomayor, Florida Republican Gov. Charlie Crist Tuesday announced he opposes her nomination.
"While I have not had the opportunity to meet personally with Judge Sotomayor -- a crucial step in the selection process -- I have reviewed and reflected upon her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and come to the conclusion that I cannot support her appointment to the United States Supreme Court," said Crist, who is seeking retiring GOP Sen. Mel Martinez's seat.
While saying she deserved respect for her accomplishments, Crist said he had concerns Sotomayor would not strictly and objectively construe the Constitution and "lacks respect for the fundamental right to keep and bear arms."
Crist had said he was too busy with his post to weigh in on the Sotomayor nomination.
Crist's Republican rival, former state House Speaker Marco Rubio, has said he would not support Sotomayor and criticized Crist for not taking a position.
Despite a lack of controversy and an emerging consensus that she will be confirmed, Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings dominated the news cycle last week.
The hearings grabbed the largest portion of the news hole -- 22 percent, according to numbers compiled weekly by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. This amount falls just short of the 24 percent garnered by the nomination announcement in the last week of May, but it comes after several weeks in which Sotomayor did not make it into Pew's news index at all.
"When you look at the content of what the news coverage was about, it does suggest there was a certain amount of sense on part of the news media saying that 'this is something we need to cover historically,' " said Amy Mitchell, deputy director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism. "They devote staff and [space in] the news hole whether there are significant headlines that come out of the day's proceedings or not."
Continue reading Hearings Top The News Cycle.
As expected, the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning delayed the panel vote of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court one week, until 10 a.m. on July 28. Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., used the brief moments in which the committee convened today to urge a quick confirmation.
"We all know that Judge Sotomayor will be confirmed," Leahy said. "I hope that once she's passed out of this committee, there will be no delay on the floor because she will have very, very few weeks after being confirmed to move to Washington, to set up her law clerks, set up her office and prepare for a major case on the McCain-Feingold bill on September 9."
Leahy was referring to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a case examining whether the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act -- commonly known as the McCain-Feingold bill -- applies to a 2008 documentary that was highly critical of then-presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. In a rare move, the Supreme Court decided at the end of its 2008 term to rehear arguments in this case on Sept. 9, even though its 2009 term doesn't start until the first week in October. "A delay will not help either Sotomayor or the Supreme Court," Leahy concluded.
Ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said that the GOP has "tried to fulfill our responsibility without any unnecessary delay."
Also as expected, Republican Susan Collins of Maine announced this morning her intent to vote for Sotomayor, becoming the sixth senator -- and fourth Republican -- to do so.
"I know that I will not agree with every decision Justice Sotomayor reaches on the court, just as I disagree with some of her previous decisions," Collins said in a statement. "However, upon reading these decisions, talking personally with her, and hearing her responses to probing questions, I have concluded that Judge Sotomayor understands the proper rule of a judge and is committed to applying the law impartially without bias or favoritism."
While accepting the near inevitability of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation before Aug. 7, Senate Republicans are using her nomination to assert broader leeway to oppose future Democratic nominees while continuing to take procedural steps to slow her progress.
Republicans today are expected to delay Sotomayor's Judiciary Committee confirmation vote by one week. And a top Senate Republican said Monday that the party might object to an up or down vote on Sotomayor if they are not given four days of floor time to discuss her nomination.
In a speech Monday announcing his opposition to Sotomayor, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., argued that Democratic opposition to GOP judicial nominees during the Bush administration has reduced the deference senators are obliged to give a president's judicial picks, freeing them to oppose nominees on philosophical, not just personal grounds.
"Deference is still an important principle," McConnell said. "But it was clearly eroded during ... the Bush administration."
Republican aides and senators said McConnell's speech, which echoes arguments he has made since November, is part of an effort to lay out a loosened standard for opposing judicial nominations. While Republicans cannot block Sotomayor, they are laying groundwork for future judicial fights.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can continue reading the story here.
Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., announced today that he will vote against Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court, becoming the seventh senator to do so.
"Her statements during the confirmation hearing before the Judiciary Committee do not always match the philosophies she has expressed prior to this hearing, such as her application of foreign law," Thune said in a statement released this evening.
Thune has been one of the more outspoken GOP senators throughout the nomination process, even going so far to launch a Web site tracking Sotomayor's confirmation. After meeting with her in late June, Thune said he had his concerns but was reserving judgment until after the hearings. In his statement today, he criticized her "narrow view" on the Second Amendment and what he sees as her tendency to inject personal feelings into judicial decision-making.
Thune is the ninth senator since the hearings ended Thursday to officially announce how he will vote. He joins Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah, who also announced their opposition. Other senators to officially say "no" so far are Jim Bunning of Kentucky, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, and Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts of Kansas.
Assuming that all Democrats line up to vote yes (none have said they will vote no), the three Republicans who announced Friday their intent to vote yes -- Mel Martinez of Florida, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Richard Lugar of Indiana -- have guaranteed at least 61 votes for Sotomayor (assuming that ailing Democratic Sens. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Robert Byrd of West Virginia miss the vote). Two Judiciary Committee Democrats, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Ben Cardin of Maryland, also released statements on Friday expressing their intent to vote yes.
Moderate Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine told reporters today that she will announce her vote tomorrow morning. She is expected to support Sotomayor, despite raising some concerns about the nominee's "wise Latina woman" remark after their meeting in early June.
Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., has scheduled a committee vote for Tuesday morning, but ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., appearing on CNN Sunday, sounded confident that the GOP members would seek to delay it a week, which they are allowed to do under committee rules. "I think the July 28 date will be the day that we'll look to have that vote," Sessions told CNN's John King.
Updated at 2:11 p.m. on July 17.
Not 24 hours after Sonia Sotomayor left the hot seat in Hart 216, three Republican senators have announced their intent to vote for her confirmation. Assuming Democratic senators are uniformly lined up for the nominee, these Republicans' support guarantees 61 "yea" votes.
Republicans Mel Martinez of Florida, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Richard Lugar of Indiana announced today they support President Obama's first Supreme Court nominee.
Nonetheless, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., today announced his opposition to Sotomayor, expressing concern that she wouldn't be bound by precedent on the high court. "She could act more freely on the kinds of views that animated her troubling and legally incorrect ruling in the Ricci [v. DeStefano] case," McConnell said in a statement dated for Monday. "That's not a chance I'm willing to take."
McConnell's opposition suggests a sizable block of Republicans will likely vote against Sotomayor (four have already announced their plans to: Jim Bunning of Kentucky, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, and Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts of Kansas).
There will likely not be any effort to delay, though. Senate Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said Thursday during the hearings that he would not lead or support a filibuster and is looking forward to a vote before the August recess.
CORRECTION: The original version of this report misstated when McConnell made his remarks.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has divided the witness list for Sonia Sotomayor's hearings into five panels. What time they appear depends on how many questions they're asked by senators and how many senators show up, a spokeswoman said.
Among the high-profile figures: New Haven, Conn., firefighter Frank Ricci, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and New York County District Attorney Robert Morgenthau in the second panel; former baseball star David Cone, former FBI Director Louis Freeh and former National Rifle Association President Sandy Froman in the third panel.
Read the full list after the jump.
Continue reading Judiciary Committee Breaks Down Witness List.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs sought to explain Sonia Sotomayor's comment Tuesday in response to a question about judicial empathy that she "wouldn't approach the issue of judging the way the president does.... Judges can't rely on what's in their heart."
Sotomayor was responding to a question by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., who asked her whether she agreed with the empathy standard President Obama has put forth.
"The president picked the person that he believed was the best possible nominee to fill a very important vacancy on the court," Gibbs said in Wednesday's White House press briefing. "I'm pretty sure that over in the White House residence there's not complete agreement on everything that's discussed."
When a reporter pressed him on exactly what those disagreements would be, Gibbs said, "I appreciate the opportunity to expand. But the president is not troubled."
While acknowledging little chance of blocking Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation, Senate Republicans, led by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, are pulling few punches in questioning Sotomayor's qualifications in a coordinated effort aimed at their conservative base and future nomination fights, aides said.
McConnell, who is not on the Judiciary Committee, has opened something like a second front against Sotomayor on the Senate floor and in news releases, taking up the issue with the persistence and focus he has used in opposing a public option in health care reform and the proposed closure of the detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
In nine floor speeches since June 23, McConnell has questioned the role of Sotomayor's personal views in her decisions, particularly in a ruling recently overturned by the Supreme Court where she upheld a New Haven, Conn., decision not to promote 18 firefighters after no black applicants scored high enough to qualify on a job test. On Monday, McConnell said the New Haven case and others "strongly suggest a pattern of unequal treatment in Judge Sotomayor's judicial record, particularly in high-profile cases."
The Senate Republican Communications Center, overseen by McConnell, also today sent seven e-mails as part of what aides said will be a hearing-long "rapid-response" effort aimed at making confirmation "a tough vote for moderates."
Sonia Sotomayor may be the one facing questions this morning about Ricci v. DeStefano, but liberal groups supporting her have made sure others involved in that case also come under scrutiny this week.
People for the American Way sent out an e-mail Friday claiming that Frank Ricci -- the lead plaintiff in the case and a key witness of Senate Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. -- has a "troubled and litigious work history." A string of lawsuits brought on his behalf suggest he has continually sued claiming employment discrimination, the group claimed.
In an interview Monday outside of Hart 216, Marge Baker, the organization's executive vice president, said her group has "simply pointed out the fact that Frank Ricci, on his own behalf, has used employment discrimination laws to help him."
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, doesn't see it that way. Speaking Monday during the hearings, he expressed concern that a "smear campaign" is forming against Ricci. "If that is true, and I hope it is not, it is beneath both contempt and the dignity that this process demands," he said.
Ricci is set to testify either Thursday or Friday, when the Judiciary Committee concludes its questioning of Sotomayor and begins with the outside witnesses Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sessions have called upon.
Baker said she doesn't think Ricci's litigation history should be the focal point of his testimony. Instead, she said, she wants a more frank discussion about the case that bears his name. "The hope is that we get away from these labels, this notion, buzzwords like 'reverse discrimination' and focus on what employment discrimination laws that are at the heart of the Ricci case."
While acknowledging little chance of blocking the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, Senate Republicans, led by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., are pulling few punches in questioning Sotomayor's qualifications in a coordinated effort aimed at their conservative base and future nomination fights, aides said.
McConnell, who is not on the Judiciary Committee, has opened something like a second front against Sotomayor on the Senate floor and in news releases, taking up the issue with the persistence and focus he has used in opposing a public option in healthcare reform and the proposed closure of the detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
In nine floor speeches since June 23, McConnell has questioned the role of Sotomayor's personal views in her decisions, particularly in a ruling recently overturned by the Supreme Court where she upheld a New Haven, Conn., decision not to promote 18 firefighters after no black applicants scored high enough to qualify on a job test.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can continue reading the story here.
Sotomayor is sworn in during her confirmation hearing. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., wants TV cameras in the Supreme Court and wants to know what Sonia Sotomayor thinks about that. While she hasn't taken a position on this issue, as soon as Specter brought up the topic, a smile spread across the nominee's face.
During his opening remarks in the afternoon of Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, Specter touched on a variety of topics, including presidential powers and the high court's impact on cap-and-trade legislation. He concluded by addressing the especially relevant topic of TV cameras in the courtrooms. After all, dozens of TV cameras are flanking Room 216 of the Hart Senate Office Building -- the location of Sotomayor's hearings -- and the clicking of still cameras has been ubiquitous since 10 a.m.
House and Senate proceedings are televised, and "a lot of people are fascinated by this confirmation," Specter said, noting the number of cameras in the room. He added that Sotomayor should be accustomed to having cameras in the courtroom, since the Second Circuit has long allowed such coverage. He then hearkened back to something retiring Justice David Souter has said: that if a TV camera were ever allowed inside the Supreme Court, it would have to "roll over my dead body."
"If you're confirmed, they won't have to roll over his dead body," Specter quipped to Sotomayor, prompting laughter from the audience.
Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee used the first day of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings to focus as much on President Obama's "empathy standard" as on the nominee's judicial record.
In opening statements, GOP senators said Obama's stated preference for judicial nominees with "empathy" could introduce subjectivity into the judiciary. "The question is whether Judge Sonia Sotomayor agrees with President Obama's theory," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.
Democrats, meanwhile, argued Sotomayor's long record as a careful, fact-bound jurist will make her a more restrained jurist than Chief Justice John Roberts, who has proven willing to reject precedent to push the court rightward.
"We do not have to speculate on what kind of a judge she will be because we've seen what kind of judge she has been," said Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can continue reading the story here.
A protester is led away during the confirmation hearings. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Four anti-abortion protesters have already been escorted out of Hart 216 on Day One of the Sotomayor hearing. That doesn't surprise Charmaine Yoest, the president of Americans United for Life and one of 14 witnesses called by ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. Anti-abortion protesters have been demonstrating outside the Hart Building throughout the day as well.
The outbursts "underscore that the grassroots really are energized about this and are paying attention," Yoest said in an interview during the lunchtime break at today's hearing.
"They're grasping at straws," said Marge Baker, executive vice president of People for the American Way. "But I guess it's something that feeds their base."
Yoest is scheduled to testify on Thursday, primarily to highlight Sotomayor's involvement with LatinoJustice PRLDEF and make the argument that, as she put it, "a vote for Sotomayor is a vote for unrestricted abortion on demand." PRLDEF has taken positions in opposition to parental notification and bans on partial birth abortion, Yoest said.
Yoest also said she has heard rumors that Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Al Franken, D-Minn., will be "pretty aggressive in their questions" when she takes the stand Thursday, but "we're welcoming the opportunity to get out her record."
"If people are surprised about how much abortion is coming into play, maybe that's because they haven't been paying attention to her record," Yoest said.
For more on abortion stakeholders' role in the hearings, see this NationalJournal.com video.
Sotomayor addresses the Judiciary Committee. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images)
As provided by the White House:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank Senators Schumer and Gillibrand for that kind introduction.
In recent weeks, I have had the privilege and pleasure of meeting eighty-nine gracious Senators, including all the members of this Committee. I thank you for the time you have spent with me. Our meetings have given me an illuminating tour of the fifty states and invaluable insights into the American people.
There are countless family members, friends, mentors, colleagues, and clerks who have done so much over the years to make this day possible. I am deeply appreciative for their love and support. I want to make one special note of thanks to my mom. I am here today because of her aspirations and sacrifices for both my brother Juan and me. Mom, I love that we are sharing this together. I am very grateful to the President and humbled to be here today as a nominee to the United States Supreme Court.
The progression of my life has been uniquely American. My parents left Puerto Rico during World War II. I grew up in modest circumstances in a Bronx housing project. My father, a factory worker with a third grade education, passed away when I was nine years old.
Continue reading Opening Statement Of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
This morning, in the opening session of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, took aim at President Obama for his opposition to the 2005 appellate court nomination of Janice Rogers Brown, an African American judge now sitting on the D.C. Circuit. Hatch said Brown has a "compelling life story" much like Sotomayor's.
Hatch said that when Obama opposed Brown, he "argued that the test of a qualified judicial nominee is whether she can set aside her personal views and, as he put it, 'decide each case on the facts and the merits alone." Hatch added that Obama said then "that while a nominee's race, gender and life story are important, they cannot distract from the fundamental focus on the kind of judge she will be."
Hatch continued: "But today, President Obama says that personal empathy is an essential ingredient in judicial decisions. Today, we are urged to ignore Judge Sotomayor's speeches altogether and focus only on her judicial decisions. I do not believe that we should do that."
Hatch's comments, along with opening remarks by Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., which also focused a good deal on Obama's standard for selecting judges, suggest Republicans' real target in the hearings is the president. In fact, Graham said that the hearings are "mostly about conservative and liberal politics."
"Unless you have a complete meltdown, you will be confirmed," Graham quipped to Sotomayor.
Today will be all about opening statements, with senators taking up the morning and Sonia Sotomayor taking the seat in the afternoon. The key days of testimony will be Tuesday and Wednesday, when Sotomayor will take multiple rounds of questions from senators. Her testimony might spill into Thursday, after which witnesses will testify, potentially consuming Thursday and Friday.
New York Democratic Reps. Jose Serrano and Nydia Velazquez will highlight Sotomayor's personal story and her chance to be the court's first Hispanic.
Former FBI Director Louis Freeh, former New York County District Attorney Robert Morgenthau and National Fraternal Order of Police President Chuck Canterbury will highlight Sotomayor's work as a prosecutor.
Republicans will call Frank Ricci, the firefighter from New Haven, Conn., who won a discrimination case when the Supreme Court overturned a ruling by a panel of judges that included Sotomayor, to bolster their contention that she has let her personal views affect her decisions. Former National Rifle Association head Sandy Froman will likely take shots at Sotomayor's rulings on the Second Amendment.
Republican members have said they will question Sotomayor about her past position on the board of a group providing legal advocacy for people of Puerto Rican descent that often sued cities over employment issues.
But it remains unclear if Republicans will unveil any unannounced lines of questioning or oppose Sotomayor strongly enough to risk political fallout. Democrats, including Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., have said blanket opposition to Sotomayor could alienate Hispanic voters.
National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn of Texas and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona might offer barometers of the GOP's disposition. Both sit on the committee and represent states with large Hispanic populations. And as members of leadership, both, and Cornyn in particular, must weigh the political needs of Senate Republicans.
Liberal women's groups may not be out in front pushing for Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation, but according to Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., "they're all for her."
In a press conference today with Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Boxer emphasized that women's groups are on board, despite a relative lack of visibility during the process so far. "I have heard from them," Boxer said. "They're all for her. Things are going really well. There is no need for groups to get all geared up." She added that if "things take a turn for the worse," they would be ready to fill a more public role.
Abortion rights groups such as NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood have been largely silent on the nomination. Sotomayor has never ruled directly on the constitutionality of abortion, and her only ruling of note on the issue was a dismissal of a claim brought by a reproductive rights group in 2002 challenging the so-called Mexico City Policy, which banned U.S. aid to organizations that performed or promoted abortions abroad. In that case, she ruled that the policy was within the confines of precedent. Still, the White House has signaled that she subscribes to its view of a constitutional right to privacy, which is the backbone of Roe v. Wade.
A coalition of conservative women's groups released statements this morning expressing concern about Sotomayor's record, which they said does skew in favor of abortion rights. "Sonia Sotomayor's record of support for judicial activism and her work for the pro-abortion Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund offer little comfort that she will be a friend to the unborn on the Supreme Court," wrote Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser.
New Sen. Al Franken praised Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's experience and life story after meeting with her today, saying he was "thrilled" to be joining the Senate in time for her confirmation hearings.
The Minnesota Democrat's assignments include the Judiciary Committee, which will begin its confirmation hearings Monday.
"Judge Sotomayor will be the most experienced appointee in 75 years, and has a great life story," Franken said. "... The current Supreme Court has been sliding back on the rights of Americans as employees, as parents, as consumers, and as investors, and it is critical that the next appointee understand the importance of these protections."
Today's meeting was Sotomayor's 89th with a senator. She has met with every member of the chamber except for ailing Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Robert Byrd of West Virginia, and nine Republicans: John McCain of Arizona; John Barrasso and Michael Enzi of Wyoming; Richard Burr of North Carolina; Christopher (Kit) Bond of Missouri; Richard Lugar of Indiana; Pat Roberts of Kansas; James Inhofe of Oklahoma; and John Ensign of Nevada.
Roberts and Inhofe have announced plans to vote against Sotomayor, as has Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan.
Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee leadership announced the majority and minority witnesses for Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings. Two witnesses from the American Bar Association will also testify.
Many of the names on the majority list have already spoken at events coordinated with either the White House or Senate Democrats, including Robert Morgenthau, who worked with Sotomayor as a district attorney in New York City, and Ramona Romero, president of the Hispanic National Bar Association -- who sent ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., a letter Tuesday expressing outrage at Republican attacks on the nominee.
Also on the majority list are New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, former FBI Director Louis Freeh and former baseball player David Cone (presumably to discuss Sotomayor's adjudication of the 1994-1995 baseball strike).
Judging from his list, Sessions intends to focus a good deal on Sotomayor's ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano. The list includes Frank Ricci, the first plaintiff in that case; Ben Vargas, another firefighter who joined in the suit; and Linda Chavez, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, who recently wrote an op-ed taking Sotomayor to task over Ricci.
The following is the complete list, per a committee press release:
Continue reading Witness List Includes Bloomberg, Ricci.
In playing up Sonia Sotomayor's judicial record on criminal law, the White House and Senate Democrats are making a solid non-ideological case for her as a Supreme Court nominee, a handful of law professors said in a conference call today.
"In a way, the White House seems to be going on the offense when there is no defense," said Robert Weisberg of Stanford Law School. "I think that's the point: She has a long and very solid record on criminal law. It demonstrates the continuity in her past and current career."
Indeed, Sotomayor's critics haven't focused on Sotomayor's criminal law record unless asked specifically about it -- even after three recent press conferences by the administration and others touting Sotomayor's credentials. The most recent was by Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., on Tuesday.
Weisberg and six other professors were speaking in coordination with a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee signed by nearly 1,200 professors from every state (except Alaska, which has no law school). In the letter, the professors describe Sotomayor as a "fair-minded" jurist who has a history of bipartisan support. (Click here to see a full list of law schools represented. A list of names is at the end of the letter.)
Harvard Law School professor Charles Ogletree went so far to describe Sotomayor as a "conservative judge" in criminal cases. He also echoed a point that Vice President Joe Biden addressed to law enforcement personnel in the first press conference June 9 -- that "as you do your job, know that Judge Sotomayor has your back as well. And throughout this nominating process, I know you'll have her back." Ogletree said during the call that Sotomayor "is exactly what the police are looking for," given her experience as a prosecutor. "I'm not surprised the White House is waving this flag because it's a very encouraging one," Ogletree said.
In a separate Web chat today, Brookings Institute fellow Russell Wheeler expressed similar sentiments. "It's an area in which her decisions have been especially balanced -- some for prosecution, some for defense," Wheeler wrote. "It is still a hot-button issue and a point of contention with the general public."
Senate Democrats received some hefty reading material from the White House today during their caucus luncheon. According to a spokesman for Senate Majority Harry Reid, D-Nev., the administration distributed briefing books -- about one-inch thick -- on Sonia Sotomayor. Aimed at helping prep Democrats for her confirmation hearings next week, they delve into her rulings and biography.
The National Rifle Association may not be taking an official position on Sonia Sotomayor yet, but in a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee leadership today, the group went right up to the edge of announcing its opposition.
NRA Executive Director Chris Cox expressed his organization's "very serious concerns" about the nomination, particularly involving Maloney v. Cuomo, in which Sotomayor affirmed a lower court's ruling that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states.
Cox wrote that the nominee's rulings in Maloney, along with United States v. Sanchez-Villar, "have been dismissive of the Second Amendment and have troubling implications for future cases that are certain to come before the court. Therefore, we believe that America's eighty million gun owners have good reason to worry."
If Sotomayor makes "hostile or evasive" statements on gun rights during confirmation hearings, Cox added, "we will have no choice but to oppose her nomination to the court."
Continue reading NRA: Sotomayor 'Dismissive' Of Gun Rights.
Senate Democrats today touted Sonia Sotomayor's record of backing law enforcement and her top rating from the American Bar Association while Republicans pressed claims that her personal views have influenced her decisions.
"Judge Sotomayor's criminal justice record proves that she is a moderate judge, whose decisions in criminal cases rarely differ from those of her colleagues on the federal bench," Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said at a news conference with the heads of nine law enforcement groups that have urged Sotomayor's confirmation.
Leahy released a review by his committee's majority staff of 800 criminal cases handled by Sotomayor, saying it shows she "is unquestionably a consensus judge on criminal justice issues." The study says she agreed with Republican-appointed judges 97 percent of the time and affirmed criminal convictions in 92 percent of cases.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can continue reading the story here.
In a letter sent today to White House Counsel Greg Craig, the American Bar Association announced its unanimous rating of Sonia Sotomayor as "highly qualified," the highest level of qualification the organization gives out.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in a statement that this rating "should eliminate the doubts of naysayers who have questioned Judge Sotomayor's disposition on the bench."
Throughout the process of evaluation, which began shortly after Sotomayor's nomination at the end of May, a team of law professors, lawyers, Supreme Court law clerks and other experts familiar with the high court examined Sotomayor's legal writings. The evaluation doesn't take into account a nominee's philosophy or ideology and has three tiers: not qualified, qualified and highly qualified.
A rating of "well qualified" is the norm among Supreme Court nominees. The last four -- John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg -- all received this rating by a unanimous vote as well.
Last week, the New York Bar Association also rated Sotomayor highly qualified.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., today will hold the Democrats' third press conference touting Sonia Sotomayor's record on criminal law cases. Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., held one last month with two Hispanic groups, and Vice President Joe Biden hosted one at the White House a few weeks prior to that with eight major law enforcement agencies in attendance.
This latest presser, scheduled for 11:30 this morning, will include organizations from both previous events, including the Fraternal Order of Police and the National Latino Peace Officers Association.
So why are the administration and Senate Democrats holding so many events about Sotomayor's record on criminal law cases? Legal experts say the issue is one that resonates with most Americans. Conservative groups, not surprisingly, see the press conferences as a way of distracting from Sotomayor's views on more controversial issues. "Her judicial philosophy looks through a race-colored lens, and that raises doubts about her ability to inflict equal justice on law and order issues," Gary Marx, executive director of the Judicial Confirmation Network, told this blog several weeks ago.
When Sonia Sotomayor appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee next week and is later considered by the full Senate, she won't face many strangers.
Headed into the hearing, Sotomayor has met with 88 senators, including every Democrat but ailing Sens. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Sen.-elect Al Franken, D-Minn., and all but nine Republicans.
The weeks of courtesy visits are more than photo opportunities, White House and Senate aides currently and previously involved in the process said. The meetings help prepare the nominee for the questions they will face in their confirmation hearing, the aides said.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read the full story here.
If confirmed, Sonia Sotomayor will change the dynamics of the Supreme Court more than most people think, agreed the panelists at a discussion held in Washington this morning and hosted by the American Constitution Society.
"A new justice changes the dynamic of the way the justices react to each other," said Paul Clement, former solicitor general and current partner at King & Spalding. He predicted Sotomayor's presence would be especially consequential in business cases, where retiring Justice David Souter "has not been a reliable vote for the so-called liberal wing of the court."
John Payton, president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, echoed Clement's thoughts about the dynamics of the court. "You really are going to see a changed court," he predicted. "That will be evident in not just outcomes in specific cases. She is not Justice Souter, because everybody is different. I think it will change oral arguments."
The panel was held to review the high court's recently-concluded term, but inevitably, Sotomayor's nomination crept into the discussion. Still, she wasn't mentioned as much as she might have been: "You know you're at an ACS discussion and not a Federalist Society discussion because every other sentence doesn't begin with 'Sotomayor's ruling in Ricci' or 'Sotomayor's ruling in that case or this case,'" quipped panelist Tom Goldstein, a Supreme Court litigator with Akin Gump and the founder of SCOTUSblog.
Goldstein went on to argue, as he has elsewhere, that Sotomayor's confirmation hearings will be a non-event because at this point her confirmation seems inevitable. "I don't expect a thermonuclear war over Sotomayor," he said, predicting a final vote somewhere in the ballpark of 75-25.
Speaking more broadly about the court in the Obama era, Andrew Pincus, a partner at Mayer Brown and professor at Yale Law School, wondered "about a conservative court confronting a much more liberal Congress and administration -- how that interaction works with respect to deference and whether the court will feel pushed or push itself to adopt constitutional limits."
The panelists also made sure not to forget Souter in the discussion. David Frederick, a partner at Kellogg, Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel who argued three cases in front of the high court this term, praised the "gentlemanly" way Souter posed questions and said the justice "brought to the court a strength of character and civility that our justice system needs. The court is all the worse with his retirement."
Updated at 2:30 p.m. on July 2.
Sonia Sotomayor has concluded all her requested meetings with senators so far, according to the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee. She has had a total of 88 meetings, a White House spokesperson said.
NationalJournal.com has confirmed -- by way of official press releases and news reports -- that all Democrats (except for ailing Sens. Robert Byrd, D-W.V., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and incoming Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.) and all but nine Republicans have met with her. Since Franken has been told that his committee assignments will include the Judiciary Committee, he will likely meet with Sotomayor soon.
A White House spokesperson said Sotomayor will continue to meet with senators up until the confirmation vote, if they request a meeting. The nine Republicans who apparently have not met with the nominee are:
• John McCain, Arizona
• John Ensign, Nevada
• John Barrasso, Wyoming
• Richard Burr, North Carolina
• Michael Enzi, Wyoming
• Christopher (Kit) Bond, Missouri
• Richard Lugar, Indiana
• Pat Roberts, Kansas (who announced he'll vote against her)
• James Inhofe, Oklahoma (who refused to meet with her and also said he'd vote no.)
The other Republican senator who has announced he'll vote against Sotomayor is Sam Brownback of Kansas, who did meet with her.
NationalJournal.com reached out to each of the nine Republicans' offices for confirmation that they have not requested a meeting, and at time of publication we have heard back from only three.
A McCain spokesperson said in an e-mail that the senator "is more than happy to meet with Judge Sotomayor at any time -- a meeting has not been requested." The White House has said, though, that it's up to the senator, not the nominee, to request a meeting. A spokesperson for Lugar confirmed the senator has not met with Sotomayor and said he is waiting until the hearings to decide how he will vote. Ensign "wants to meet with her and plans to do so," his office said Wednesday, and hopes "to have it scheduled soon."
CORRECTION: Sotomayor will meet with senators up until the confirmation vote. The original version of this report had an earlier cutoff.
A day after the Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit's ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano, the left-leaning Alliance for Justice issued its fourth and final report analyzing Sonia Sotomayor's opinions. The group saved the most controversial cases for last, focusing this time on Sotomayor's constitutional and civil decisions, including Ricci, the gun rights case Maloney v. Cuomo, the voting rights case Hayden v. Pataki and a handful of decisions touching on the issue of abortion. Prior Alliance reports have examined her rulings in criminal law and business and consumer cases.
While the group doesn't officially take positions on nominations, the Alliance's legal experts were quick to come to Sotomayor's defense on Ricci.
"There are two obvious points" making it "hard to see how Ricci would be much of an issue in the confirmation process," said the group's legal director, William Yeomans. Since the Supreme Court majority opinion in the case announced a new standard for interpreting Title XII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Yeomans said, there was no way Sotomayor could have applied it as an appellate judge at the time she heard the case. Yeomans added that the justice she will replace if confirmed, David Souter, ruled with the liberal dissenting judges.
As evidence that Sotomayor does not always side with any one ethnic group, Jennifer Meinig, a researcher with the Alliance, pointed to King v. American Airlines Inc., in which Sotomayor wrote the opinion of a unanimous panel rejecting a claim of racial discrimination brought by two African Americans after they were bumped from a flight.
Continue reading Alliance Report Examines Ricci, Maloney And Other Controversial Cases.
Monday night, Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., made a rallying cry for conservatives in opposition to Sonia Sotomayor: "We need you involved in this process," he said in a conference call administered by the Judicial Confirmation Network. "What you are all doing is so important, to help us as we communicate Judge Sotomayor's judicial record."
Thune, who has been one of the most outspoken Republicans in the process (he has launched a Web site tracking the nomination), expressed concern about Sotomayor's involvement in LatinoJustice PRLDEF and the Democrats' timetable.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., "are going to jam through this lifetime appointment rather than provide a full and fair review of her record," he warned.
The conference call differed from others of its kind in that the JCN opened it up not just to the media, but to individual citizens as well. Gary Marx, the group's executive director, said "thousands" of people were on the call.
The Supreme Court reversed the 2nd Circuit's ruling on Ricci v. DeStefano Monday, but that doesn't necessarily mean Sonia Sotomayor is ethically allowed to talk about the case in her upcoming confirmation hearings.
Tom Goldstein, Supreme Court litigator at Akin Gump and founder of SCOTUSblog, said that since the case is still technically "alive" -- the question of damages to the firefighters will require additional proceedings to determine -- Sotomayor is still prohibited by the Judicial Canons of Ethics from talking about this case.
"The Ninth Justice" explored this question earlier this month, and it seems that now, despite a ruling on the case, experts are still split on the technicality.
In a conference call Monday with reporters, Center for Equal Opportunity President and General Counsel Roger Clegg said that, had the case been remanded instead of reversed, Sotomayor "could have declined to answer questions about the case on the grounds that it was still in litigation.... That avenue is now shut off because, as I read it, the case is over."
Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, said much the same thing in a statement issued Monday: "Now that the Supreme Court has reversed Sotomayor's Ricci decision, rather than remanding as many had predicted, her rationale for declining to discuss the case has vanished."
Interest groups across the political spectrum were ready for the Supreme Court's Ricci v. DeStefano ruling this morning. With many court observers expecting a reversal or remand, a variety of groups involved in Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation battle were scheduling conference calls hours after the ruling came down and lining up experts to talk about what impact the case might have on both the imminent hearings and employment law more generally.
After the jump, we've rounded up reaction from several interest group leaders who have been prominent in the SCOTUS debate so far.
Continue reading Interest Groups Move Fast On Ricci.
Senate Democrats argued today's Supreme Court decision overruling a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appellate judge does not bear on her record except to highlight her tendency to judicial modesty, while Republicans tried cautiously to exploit the ruling.
"The main charge against Judge Sotomayor is that she will be an activist judge, but this decision clearly shows that she won't," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who is part of the Democratic leadership and sits on the Judiciary Committee.
"The results in this case won't change things a wit... in fact it bolsters [the claim] that she is mainstream," Schumer added in a conference call.
Senate Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., argued the opposite. In a statement, Sessions said that "this case sharpens our focus on Judge Sotomayor's troubling speeches and writings, which indicate... that personal experiences and political views should influence a judge's decision. That theory is a breathtaking departure from the proper role of the American judge and will clearly be the subject of questioning at the upcoming hearing."
Subscribers to CongressDaily can continue reading the story here.
Updated at 9 a.m. on June 30
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and White House press secretary Robert Gibbs both said today that Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court has only become more urgent because of an announcement made today by the high court -- and it's not the Ricci case.
In a rare move, the court decided to schedule a re-argument of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission -- which examines whether a movie critical of then-presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton violated campaign finance laws -- for Sept. 9, during the court's summer recess, instead of early October, when it begins its next term.
"The urgency of her confirmation has become greater as the result of the Supreme Court's action today," Schumer said in a conference call with reporters, adding that this is "another reason we should confirm Sotomayor quickly, so she can be in place to hear it."
In the White House briefing Monday, Gibbs echoed Schumer's thoughts, referencing the same case. "I think that underscores the importance of ensuring that we get a new Supreme Court nominee there in order to become... an active participant in that case, rather than potentially have something that's a four-to-four decision."
Updated at 6:10 p.m. on June 29.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., is picking up a common Democratic theme today: that the Supreme Court's ruling in Ricci v. DeStefano this morning should not reflect poorly on Sonia Sotomayor.
"Judge Sotomayor and the lower court panel did what judges are supposed to do, they followed precedent," Leahy said. He added that a ruling for the firefighters who were suing New Haven, Conn., over their withheld promotions "would have been judicial activism contrary to clearly settled and longstanding Second Circuit precedent. The Second Circuit was bound by this precedent and not free to adopt a new interpretation of the law, as the Supreme Court has done today."
As a follow-up point about Sotomayor's "judicial restraint," Leahy touted the nominee's endorsement by the American Hunters and Shooters Association and a variety of law enforcement agencies.
The left-leaning People For The American Way was also out early with a response. In fact, it first released its statement on Thursday, when Ricci could have been handed down. Executive Vice President Marge Baker sounded the same notes as Leahy, saying that Sotomayor was restrained by precedent and ruling any other way would have been judicial activism. Baker also argued that "Sotomayor is anything but an outlier," a reference to Republicans' emerging attack strategy (subscription).
A handful of groups on both sides of the aisle have scheduled conference calls with reporters this afternoon to discuss the ruling's impact on Sotomayor's nomination hearings, which are due to begin July 13.
CORRECTION: The Senate Judiciary Committee has not scheduled a conference call, contrary to the original version of this report.
Sonia Sotomayor was the stated topic of conversation during a panel discussion today among four major conservative organizations, but the focus remained largely on President Obama.
"This confirmation debate serves as an opportunity that we didn't have in the election. It affords the opportunity to show the American people the consequences of their votes," said Manuel Miranda, chairman of the Third Branch Conference. "When they voted last November for a very charismatic candidate who also happened to be African American, they did not know that they were electing someone who would appoint judges who would rewrite the law."
The discussion, hosted by Judicial Watch, highlighted continuing concerns on the right about Sotomayor: the New Haven firefighters case, the "wise Latina" woman comment, gun rights and the "empathy" standard. But throughout the discussion panelists kept coming back to Obama. In fact, that's how Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton opened up the discussion.
"We have to give points to President Obama for clarity on his judicial philosophy," Fitton said. "Sotomayor is a constantly shifting landscape. She is moment-to-moment on her moods, bias and personal whims. That problem would arise with any Supreme Court nominee of Barack Obama's."
The panelists, who also included Roger Clegg, president and general counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity, and Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice, acknowledged what most SCOTUS observers have been saying all along: that Sotomayor is likely to be confirmed. With that in mind, conservatives see this nomination as an opportunity to send Obama a message about his future court appointments: that they will not hesitate to put up a fight over what they see as judicial activism.
Continue reading Conservative Groups See 'Teaching Moment'.
Per the White House, Sonia Sotomayor is meeting with the following senators today: Jim Bunning, R-Ky.; Mike Johanns, R-Neb.; John Kerry, D-Mass.; Jeff Merkley, D-Ore.; and James Risch, R-Idaho.
In a report released today, the left-leaning Alliance for Justice examined some of Sonia Sotomayor's business and consumer law decisions, which make up a substantial part of the 2nd Circuit caseload.
In a conference call today with reporters, the Alliance highlighted some of Sotomayor's better-known business rulings, including her now-famous move as a district judge to end the 1995 baseball strike, and an appellate case on NFL eligibility rights. Her rulings in these and other labor cases show that she "cannot be pigeonholed as pro-union, pro-employer, or pro-employee," the report states. Sotomayor included both these cases on her lists of significant decisions in her Senate questionnaire, but they have not been a factor in the nomination debate.
Michael Greve, an American Enterprise Institute scholar, said that business cases tend to be too "deep in the weeds" to trigger much scrutiny. "I don't think the business community will man the barricades over this stuff," he said.
Although he was sharply critical of Sotomayor when the nomination was announced, Greve's view now squares with the Alliance's evaluation. "She has a fairly moderate record. Her record in employment law cases is sometimes pro-employer, sometimes pro-employee," he said. "There is no overall bias that plaintiff always wins."
The one point which could make business leaders uneasy, Greve said, is her record in class-action rulings. "She was remarkably friendly to class-action suits, even considering she is on a very pro-plaintiff court," Greve said. "If anybody is nervous about anything, that's probably what people will pay attention to."
The Alliance report highlighted the fact that the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce has endorsed Sotomayor, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has yet to do so. The U.S. Chamber is conducting an evaluation of her record, according to a spokesperson.
(The New York Times and The Volokh Conspiracy have more on Sotomayor's business rulings).
On Tuesday evening, Republicans went on the offensive against Sonia Sotomayor on the Senate floor. Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and John Cornyn, R-Texas, raised the issues of Sotomayor's membership in the LatinoJustice PRLDEF (formerly the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund), her rulings in cases like Ricci v. DeStefano and Hayden v. Pataki, and the "empathy" question.
Less reported in various stories this morning were remarks by three Democratic senators in reaction to the GOP's coordinated speeches -- Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Robert Menendez, D-N.J.
The senators sought to refute various claims made by the Republicans, and they stuck firmly to their July 13 date for beginning the confirmation hearings.
See excerpts after the jump.
Continue reading Leahy, Schumer & Menendez Respond To GOP.
Per the White House, Sonia Sotomayor will meet with the following senators today: Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; Mark Begich, D-Alaska; Tom Harkin, D-Iowa; Mark Pryor, D-Ark.; and John Thune, R-S.D.
The Thune meeting could be exceptionally interesting, considering he has launched a conservative-minded Web site tracking Sotomayor's nomination. Although he's not on the Senate Judiciary Committee, he is up for re-election in 2010 and has been rumored as a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2012. NationalJournal.com last week analyzed the electoral game theory that sometimes comes into play for senators with a Supreme Court nominee.
Updated at 5:00 p.m. on June 23.
Senate Republicans today stepped up their criticism of Sonia Sotomayor in a coordinated effort laying out the likely GOP line of questioning at her July 13 confirmation hearing.
In a series of floor speeches, Republicans stopped short of flat opposition, but they repeatedly cited their concerns with "troubling" statements and rulings they will ask Sotomayor to address.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., offered his first extended comments on Sotomayor by saying criticisms of her for favoring what Republicans label the "empathy standard" and for particular remarks are borne out by her judicial and academic record.
He zeroed in on Sotomayor's comment printed in a 2002 Berkeley Law Journal article 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." McConnell argued that that sentiment is reflected in Sotomayor's subjective reading of the law and "underscores rather than alleviates concerns with this particular approach."
Subscribers to CongressDaily can continue reading the story here.
Excerpts and video from senators' floor speeches after the jump.
Continue reading GOP Opens Attack On Sotomayor.
In a press conference today, Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., underscored an increasingly familiar Democratic line: that Sonia Sotomayor would bring exceptional qualifications -- as well as ethnic diversity -- to the court. Menendez was accompanied by representatives from the Hispanic National Bar Association and the National Latino Peace Officers Association. Vice President Joe Biden held a similar event a few weeks ago at the White House with eight national law enforcement agencies touting Sotomayor's record on criminal cases.
When asked after the conference about a fine line some say the White House and Democrats are walking -- touting Sotomayor's racial heritage while at the same saying it's not a factor -- Menendez reiterated a familiar talking point: that it's the "totality of her experiences" that qualify Sotomayor for the Supreme Court.
During the presser, Art Acevedo, president of the National Latino Peace Officers Association, said Republican complaints about not having enough time to research Sotomayor's record are disingenuous. "If she is not on the court in October, it will be because of politics," Acevedo said.
These arguments have served Democrats well so far in the process, said one conservative observer. "I think they thought the nomination would put Senate Republicans in a box, and that game is still going on," said Ed Whelan, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and contributor to National Review's Bench Memos blog. "They're trying to build that box and make it tight."
Per the White House, Sonia Sotomayor is meeting today with the following senators:
Bob Corker, R-Tenn.; Tim Johnson, D-S.D.; George Voinovich, R-Ohio; Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.; Roger Wicker, R-Miss.; and Mark Warner, D-Va.
Sonia Sotomayor announced this afternoon that she would resign from the networking club known as the Belizean Grove, just more than a week after Judiciary Republicans questioned whether her membership in the all-female organization was a violation of judicial ethics.
In a letter to Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Sotomayor insisted that "the Belizean Grove does not practice invidious discrimination and my membership did not violate the Judicial Code of Ethics." But, she added, "I do not want questions about this to distract anyone from my qualifications and record."
Canon 2 of the Judicial Code of Ethics forbids judges from "membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin."
Also this afternoon, Sotomayor released further documents related to her work with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, in response to a joint request sent yesterday by both Leahy and Sessions.
The Democratic Policy Committee held a briefing yesterday on the Ricci v. DeStefano case. According to a White House official, this is part of a regular series of briefings the committee is holding on some of Sonia Sotomayor's key cases. (The source would not elaborate on which other cases will be addressed.)
NationalJournal.com has learned that two experts spoke at the hearing. One was Austin Schlick, counsel of record for the State of Maryland on an amicus brief filed by six states on behalf of the City of New Haven in the Ricci case. The second, University of Michigan law professor Richard Primus, sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday addressing the anti-discrimination issues -- specifically, equal protection and disparate impact -- that are at stake in Ricci.
Primus has been researching Ricci's legal implications for years. Sotomayor's nomination has simply made this issue more important to more people, he said in an interview. "I had some contact with the White House before I wrote the letter," Primus said. "But I also told them that I was going to write a letter with my views. So, the letter is from me." He would not comment on the details of the briefing or whether he has continued to be in contact with the White House since sending the letter.
In the letter, Primus said that the courts' rulings -- the district court's decision ruling in favor of the City of New Haven, the appellate three-judge panel affirming the lower court's ruling and the full court's refusal to rehear it -- should not be surprising. "It's an issue that's politically controversial, but it's not controversial legally. Legally, it's an easy issue," Primus said. "The complicated thing is that the Supreme Court is probably going to change the law on it, which means that even though it wasn't a complicated issue before, it's going to look like all the judges who decided it got it wrong. It's not going to mean that. The judges made the decision, and then the court changed the rule."
The Supreme Court is set to hand down its decision on Ricci the end of this month.
President Obama appointed two more appellate judges today -- Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr. for the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and Beverly B. Martin for the Eleventh Circuit. Greenaway currently serves on the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey and Martin serves on the District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
Obama has nominated a total of five appellate judges now. He nominated his first three in late March and early April.
Read their bios, per the White House, after the jump.
Continue reading Obama Nominates Two More Appellate Judges.
Senate Judiciary Committee member Amy Klobuchar this morning urged a roomful of lawyers, legal experts and representatives from liberal organizations to be "ambassadors of truth as we go through" Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings.
"When people question whether she is smart enough -- you can't make up that you're Phi Beta Kappa," said the Minnesota Democrat, making a point about Sotomayor's academic honors and her credentials in general. "They're facts."
Klobuchar was speaking as part of the liberal American Constitution Society's annual convention, a three-day conference at the Renaissance Mayflower Hotel in Washington. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., addressed the conference when it opened Thursday night. White House Counsel Greg Craig and Ron Klain, Vice President Joe Biden's chief of staff and a key handler for Sotomayor, are among the Obama administration figures taking part in a panel discussion tonight.
Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D), herself a rumored candidate for the Supreme Court nomination, will speak at lunch this afternoon.
Klobuchar recalled her meeting with Sotomayor on June 4, drawing parallels between their lives and the way they both view the law. The senator hearkened back to her eight years as a prosecutor in Minnesota to underscore the experience Sotomayor has gained while at the New York County District Attorney's Office.
"As a prosecutor, after you've worked with defendants and victims of crimes... you know that the law is not an abstract subject. It has a real impact on people's lives," Klobachar said. "When I met with her for an hour, I got that sense that she understood that. It's not just a book that's sitting in your... basement."
The senator took particular exception to criticism that Sotomayor is too tough on lawyers as an appellate judge. "At least where I come from, asking tough questions and having very little patience is the very definition of a judge," Klobuchar said. "I was hoping we'd get to a point in this country where we would get appointed rough, to-the-point female justices just as we've appointed male judges" with similar characteristics.
As for charges that Sotomayor is too liberal, Klobuchar said some on the left wonder if she's liberal enough. And the argument that she would be a judicial activist on the high court doesn't stand, the senator added. "I'm sure some people in this room would want her to be more of an activist judge," she said, prompting several nods of agreement among audience members.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., rejected a new Republican demand today to delay the confirmation hearings of Sonia Sotomayor due to start July 13.
He said it would be a "double standard" to put off the committee hearings until September. The last two Supreme Court nominees -- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito -- received hearings within 40 days of their answering committee questionnaires. Her hearings are scheduled to start 39 days after initial receipt of her questionnaire, he said.
Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., sought the delay until September at a committee meeting today, claiming her questionnaire is incomplete, with "serious gaps" in answers to questions about her work on the Yale Law Journal and as a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge. Leahy said she will provide supplemental answers, as did Roberts and Alito. "It would be a double standard to delay confirmation hearings on the Sotomayor nomination until September, and would make the Sotomayor confirmation process the longest of any sitting justice on the Supreme Court," Leahy said.
Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., today announced his backing for Sonia Sotomayor in a floor speech, praising her "extraordinary" judicial record and highlighting the diversity she will bring to the Supreme Court if confirmed.
As a former chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Specter is a key voice on the nomination, though his position is complicated by his recent switch to the Democratic Party. Bucking his former GOP colleagues, Specter expressed support for the confirmation hearings timetable set by Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., which Republicans have complained is unnecessarily rushed.
"I think Chairman Leahy was correct in moving the hearing date so that the confirmation process could be concluded in time for Judge Sotomayor, if confirmed, to sit with the court during September when the court will decide what cases it will hear," Specter said. "A great deal of the important work of the Supreme Court of the United States is decided on what cases they decide not to hear."
Specter acknowledged the issues that have framed the debate surrounding Sotomayor's nomination so far, including her "wise Latina woman" comment and the New Haven firefighters' case. But, he said, "The nuances of affirmative action don't lend themselves too well to brief newspaper articles or sound bites on the talk shows. They're made for a Supreme Court hearing."
Specter faces a likely primary challenge in a state with a sizable Hispanic population.
The senator also discussed a letter he sent to Sotomayor this week that asks for her views on the court's deference to congressional fact-finding when evaluating legislation.
In the letter, Specter expresses concern that Chief Justice John Roberts' oral arguments in Northwest Austin v. Holder, a pending case that challenges provisions of the Voting Rights Act, seem to contradict statements he made to Specter on congressional fact-finding during his 2005 confirmation hearings. The letter asks for Sotomayor's opinion on the issue, and specifically on Roberts' 2005 statements.
The left-leaning Alliance for Justice released a report today touting Sonia Sotomayor's law-and-order bona fides. The report, which examines dozens of criminal law cases from throughout her judicial career, concludes that Sotomayor "has more experience in criminal law than any of the justices with whom she will sit if she is confirmed."
The release comes in the wake of a White House event last week that aimed to boost Sotomayor on the same issues. Eight of the nation's largest law enforcement agencies endorsed Sotomayor, with Vice President Joe Biden repeatedly telling attendees, "She gets it." "As you do your job, know that Judge Sotomayor has your back as well," Biden said. "And throughout this nominating process, I know you'll have her back."
In a conference call with reporters today, William Yeomans, the organization's legal director, and Brina Milikowsky, a legal researcher at the alliance, highlighted several cases they said illustrate Sotomayor's strong stance on criminal law issues. These included her ruling in United States v. Falso, a child pornography case, and in United States v. Moreno, a drug case where she issued a longer sentence than the default guideline.
"For the most part, she was willing to sentence defendants on the high end of the guideline recommendations, both in white collar and violent crimes," Milikowsky said.
"One area we don't know much about her views is the death penalty," Yeomans said. "She has not had an occasion on the bench to rule on" that issue. He did, however, reference a 1981 memo Sotomayor signed onto while a board member of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund that indicated she was against it.
Throughout the call, the group tried to underscore Sotomayor's adherence to precedent and her careful judicial style in criminal law cases. It's "virtually impossible" to predict how jurists might rule on the high court, Yeomans said, but Sotomayor is "certainly not someone who is going to veer off widely in one direction or another."
Tempers flared in the Senate Judiciary Committee today when Republicans pressed for a delay of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings, which are slated to begin July 13.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., accused Republicans of seeking the delay at the behest of conservative groups that have been organizing a campaign to find fault with Sotomayor and scuttle her nomination. She said there were "groups out there who need more time for attacks and sound bites." Feinstein added at another point, "This is a woman who is qualified, who is brilliant, and who worked her way up."
Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., denied the allegation and took personal offense at it. "First of all I don't like having my motives questioned. ... I suggest we just cool it," he said, noting that President Obama announced Sotomayor's nomination only two weeks ago.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said Sotomayor was entitled to be confirmed at least as quickly as Chief Justice John Roberts, who appeared before the committee less than two months after being nominated. Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said that Roberts' 2005 confirmation had to be expedited so that he could fill the vacancy left by the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist in time for the start of the court's fall term. "We don't have those pressures now," Sessions said.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read the entire PM edition here.
Per the White House, Sonia Sotomayor is scheduled to meet today with:
• Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii
• Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas
• Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla.
• Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich.
• Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo.
Senate Judiciary Republicans, following up claims yesterday that Sonia Sotomayor's responses to the panel's questionnaire were incomplete, have sent a letter asking Sotomayor for certain speeches and other materials that were not included in the documents turned over to the committee as part of her response. The four-page long letter also asks her to further explain some answers the senators deemed incomplete.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., told reporters Wednesday that Republicans were applying a different standard than that used for John Roberts, who is now the Chief Justice. During the Roberts confirmation process, "thousands of documents weren't dropped off until a couple of days before the hearing and they weren't the least bit upset and didn't complain about him. But now they are complaining about a couple papers from her," Leahy said, emphasizing "him" and "her." He joked, "I don't think it's a double standard, I think it's a coincidence." A Leahy aide cited press reports that said Roberts turned over 75,000 documents from his time at the Justice Department and executive branch just days before his confirmation hearing.
Republicans have suggested they still hope for a delay in Sotomayor's confirmation, but Leahy said Tuesday that will not happen. Asked if the July 13 hearing date is set in stone, he said "yes."
The conservative Judicial Confirmation Network also issued a statement today from its general counsel, Wendy Long, charging that the incomplete questionnaire is evidence that the White House wants to rush through the nomination.
UPDATED at 4:45 p.m.
CongressDailyPM has more on the political back-and-forth that will likely follow from today's announcement:
The committee hearing will likely take most of the week, with Republicans able to delay a vote after completion of the hearing for an additional week. That would give the Senate two weeks to confirm Sotomayor before the recess, although the chamber already faces a packed July calendar.Republican aides and senators suggested today that Leahy's announcement could be a bargaining tactic. He might later seek to win backing for a late July hearing by framing a short delay as a compromise, one aide said.
Original post:
Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings will begin on July 13, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., announced today.
In a statement on the Senate floor, Leahy hearkened back to the time line set for John Roberts in 2005. He said the agreement at that time was reached before the committee received answers from the nominee to its questionnaire. "If 48 days were sufficient to prepare for that hearing, in accordance with our agreement and the initial schedule, it is certainly adequate time to prepare for the confirmation hearing for Judge Sotomayor," Leahy said. Sotomayor was nominated on May 26 -- 48 days before July 13.
Democrats are hoping for a confirmation vote in the full Senate before the August recess, despite calls from Republicans to hold the process until September. See our timeline of past SCOTUS confirmations here.
"There is no reason to unduly delay consideration of this well-qualified nominee," Leahy said. "Indeed, given the attacks on her character, there are compelling reasons to proceed even ahead of this schedule. She deserves the earliest opportunity to respond to those attacks."
The July 13 date was a goal the administration and Democratic lawmakers have had in mind from the beginning. On May 27, the day after the nomination was announced, Democratic officials viewed the week of July 13 as the "earliest date that hearings could start, with the nomination heading to the Senate floor about two weeks later." Leahy said today, however, that his target date had been July 7 and that he pushed it back a week in deference to his Republican colleagues.
Vice President Joe Biden and representatives from eight national law enforcement groups gathered at the White House this morning in praise of Sonia Sotomayor's credentials on crime.
"Sonia Sotomayor's lifelong commitment to law enforcement is hard to argue with," Biden said. "She knows firsthand the brave work of the police force in fighting crime. She has worked together with the officers and detectives on the front lines, gathering evidence and building fact by fact, witness by witness, the cases that would result in putting criminals behind bars."
The groups, including the Fraternal Order of Police, Major Cities Chiefs Association and National District Attorneys Association, sent letters to Senate Judiciary Committee leadership praising Sotomayor, who if confirmed would be the only Supreme Court justice with trial court experience. Most of the groups focused on her work as an assistant district attorney in New York early in her career, and some highlighted her prosecution of Richard Maddicks, New York's "Tarzan murderer." (Sotomayor discusses the case in her Senate questionnaire, beginning on page 162 of this PDF.)
Veteran New York County District Attorney Robert Morgenthau was on hand to tout his former employee's credentials. "She is intelligent, hard-working, and has her feet on the ground," he said. "Like young Assistant District Attorney Sotomayor, Justice Sotomayor won't be pushed around, and she will do all she can to reach the right conclusion on each case."
Opponents on the right, meanwhile, are taking issue with some of Sotomayor's stances on law enforcement issues. Wendy Long, general counsel for the Judicial Confirmation Network, admonished the administration for hosting the event and put forth a critique of the nominee's record on crime.
"Today's event looks like a county sheriff election rally," Long said. "The purpose of this sideshow is to avoid facts in Sotomayor's actual record that indicate a soft-on-crime judge who twists the law, particularly law at the intersection of race and crime issues."
On Friday, the group had lashed Sotomayor for her 1981 remark that "capital punishment is associated with evident racism in our society."
Sonia Sotomayor meets with Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, hours after breaking her ankle. (Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Sonia Sotomayor is on crutches after breaking her right ankle this morning, White House officials said. The Supreme Court nominee injured herself stumbling at LaGuardia Airport in New York and was treated at George Washington University Medical Center in Washington. Sotomayor is "looking forward to keeping her full schedule of meetings on Capitol Hill this afternoon," the White House said.
Federal Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor was first contacted by White House Counsel Greg Craig on April 27, four days before Justice David Souter's retirement was officially announced by President Obama, according to a completed questionnaire she submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee this afternoon.
"I was contacted by Gregory Craig, White House Counsel, on Monday, April 27, 2009, with respect to the possibility of a future Supreme Court vacancy," Sotomayor wrote. "Between that date and the present, I have had frequent telephone conversations with Cassandra Butts, Deputy White House Counsel, including near daily phone calls after Justice Souter on May 1, 2009 announced his intention to resign at the end of the current Supreme Court term."
Craig's outreach to Sotomayor just days prior to Souter's announcement raises questions about when the White House first learned of Souter's plans. NPR's Nina Totenberg was the first to report Souter's retirement during the evening of April 30. An AP report earlier that day cited scuttlebutt in judicial circles that Souter may retire, noting that Souter had not hired a single clerk for the court's upcoming October term.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Senate Democrats appear to be giving serious consideration to GOP demands to delay Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation vote until after the August recess in the hope that doing so will prevent Republicans from escalating the fight.
"I don't want anyone subjecting this good woman to criticism because of some arbitrary deadline I set," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said today at a news conference.
While key Democrats including Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and President Obama have said they want a confirmation vote before Aug. 7, Reid has not echoed those calls.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read the rest of the story here.
Sonia Sotomayor's completed Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire is available here. The appendix is here.
In a blog post this afternoon, White House Counsel Greg Craig underscored the administration's goal to "advance her nomination through the Senate as swiftly as possible." He wrote that she has completed the questionnaire, all 173 pages (and 130 appendix pages) of it, "faster than any Supreme Court nominee in recent history -- in just nine days." Craig said it took 13 days for John Roberts, 15 days for Ruth Bader Ginsburg and 30 days for Samuel Alito.
Craig reiterated the administration's goal to have her confirmed before September and implicitly called for a vote by the August recess: "This historically fast completion of the exhaustive questions is no small feat that will hopefully lead to her swift consideration by the Senate and enable her to be a member of the Supreme Court by the time they begin selecting cases in September."
Sotomayor has gone through Senate confirmation twice before: in 1992, after she was nominated for District Court in the Southern District of New York by President George H.W. Bush, and in 1998, after being nominated for the 2nd Circuit bench by President Bill Clinton. Per the Judiciary Committee's Web site, here are her completed questionnaires and transcripts of the confirmation hearings for both nominations:
• District Court: questionnaire and confirmation hearing
• 2nd Circuit: questionnaire and hearing
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted this morning to advance two of President Obama's appellate nominees, David Hamilton for the 7th Circuit and Andre Davis for the 4th Circuit. They now go to the full Senate for a final confirmation vote.
Hamilton, Obama's first nominee, was voted out along party lines, 12-7. Davis was 16-3, with Republicans Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Charles Grassley of Iowa and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma voting no.
A vote was also scheduled for Obama's other judicial nominee, Gerard Lynch, for the 2nd Circuit. But Sessions, the ranking member, requested that it be delayed for one week, according to a spokeswoman for Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond Law School, said he was troubled by the political bent of the debate over the lower-court nominees, especially Hamilton. "It was important that it was a straight party-line vote for Hamilton," he said. "It's troubling. I wonder if that's a precursor for what's to come."
Key senators remain at odds over the timing of Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearing after Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., failed to resolve the issue at a meeting this morning.
"We haven't reached an agreement," Sessions said, although he and an aide to Leahy called the meeting productive. "We had a good conversation and we agreed we'd continue to discuss it," Sessions said. But the two senators and Democrats and Republicans in general are at odds over a timetable. Democrats want a Judiciary Committee hearing and a Senate confirmation vote before the congressional recess scheduled to start Aug. 7. Republicans want the hearing after Congress returns in September.
Sessions and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., cite Sotomayor's thousands of opinions as an appellate judge in suggesting that senators need more than the average 60 days from nomination to the start of committee hearings for the last three Supreme Court nominees.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read rest of the story here.
(Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
First lady Michelle Obama today didn't miss an opportunity to help sell her husband's pick for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor. At a commencement ceremony today for the Washington Mathematics Science Technology Public Charter High School at Howard University, she cited the judge's story while describing how she herself felt as a high school graduate bound for Princeton University:
I was excited, but I was also worried. I was worried about whether or not I was ready, whether or not I would fit in. And I've realized since then that I probably wasn't alone in my fears, my worries. And then I read the story of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
I don't know if you know about this phenomenal woman, but she's the president's nominee for the Supreme Court, and she's the first Hispanic woman to be considered for the position. The first. And she went to Princeton. And in the story, she said when she arrived at Princeton as a freshman -- and this is nine years before I would even think about going -- she said that when she stepped on that campus... she 'felt like a visitor landing in an alien country.' She said she never raised her hand her first year because, and this is a quote, she 'was too embarrassed and too intimidated to ask questions.' So despite all her success at Princeton -- and then she went on to Yale Law School, where she was at the top of her class in both schools -- and despite all of her professional accomplishments, Judge Sotomayor says she still looks over her shoulder and wonders if she measures up.
And when I read her story, I understood exactly how she feels. ... We all felt a little like you might right now. We all had doubts. We all have doubts. We all heard nagging voices, and sometimes we still do, asking us, 'Will we be able to compete in this new arena? Will I fit in? Am I really ready?' But in the end, we were all more than ready. Judge Sotomayor is more than ready.Video highlights follow after the jump.
Continue reading Michelle Obama: Sotomayor 'More Than Ready'.
In the White House press briefing today, press secretary Robert Gibbs said that Sonia Sotomayor's completed Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire will be released sometime this week.
In response to a reporter's question about timing -- especially noting that Republicans are in no rush to vote according to any specific time table -- Gibbs hearkened back to previous SCOTUS confirmation processes.
"If you look at the time frame of number of days between the announcement of a Supreme Court pick and the hearings, for the last nine confirmed justices, it's been 51 days between the announcement and the beginning of the hearing," Gibbs said. "That would put her hearing sometime in mid-July, which would I think provide a timetable by which the due diligence of senators on both sides of the aisle can be accomplished."
(Credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Previewing her likely response to a key Republican criticism, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor said her opinions will reflect the law, not personal opinions, in a meeting today with Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy.
"Of course, one's life experience shapes what your views are, but ultimately and completely as a judge you follow the law," Leahy said Sotomayor told him when he asked how her background will influence her decisions. He said she used the phrase "ultimately and completely."
Sotomayor has been ripped by Republicans like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., for a 2001 speech where she said, "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."
Senate Republicans have been more restrained but expressed concern about the statement. The White House has said she regrets her choice of words.
The meeting with Leahy was one in a series that Sotomayor has today. With photo opportunities and media hordes on hand at each stop, the meetings appear to be ceremonial courtesies and preliminary chances for senators to question Sotomayor.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read the rest of the story here.
Sonia Sotomayor will meet with 10 senators -- the Senate leadership and several members of the Judiciary Committee -- on Tuesday.
The Supreme Court nominee will visit with Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.; Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill.; Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.; Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.; Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.; and Sens. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.
Rachel Brand, who helped the Bush White House prepare John Roberts and Samuel Alito for their Supreme Court confirmations, said the substance of these "courtesy" meetings is almost entirely up to the senator. "These meetings tend to be highly idiosyncratic.... If you know something about the senator, you could guess what [the meeting] is going to be about. It's impossible to generalize."
But they're crucial nonetheless, she said.
"It's a really important part of the process," Brand said. "Both in terms of shaping the senators' views of the nominee and also for the administration to get a feel for what kinds of things the senators are concerned about."
Right-leaning interest groups don't have a specific strategy lined up for Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation process. They concede that President Obama has put them in a political tough spot by nominating a Hispanic female justice and that the prospects of filibustering or forcing a withdrawal are slim to none. But conservative opponents still see a substantive battle to be fought, and as several GOP senators signaled on the Sunday talk shows, they're in no rush to have her confirmed.
"I don't think you can stand by and see a nominee go through a nomination with what she has said publicly about the role of judges," said one conservative D.C. lawyer who helped the Bush White House prepare John Roberts and Samuel Alito in 2005. "I don't think this is one where Republican senators can just confirm someone 96 to 3 or 4 and say, 'we're going to fight this fight on the next one."
Conservatives have roundly criticized Sotomayor, both for comments she's made in the past (notably her "wise Latina woman" comment and her remark that the "Court of Appeals is where policy is made") and for her more recent judicial work, particularly Ricci v. Stefano, in which New Haven firefighters' promotions were discarded because no black applicants made the cut. These issues haven't seemed to faze the administration or left-leaning groups about Sotomayor's competence or her chances of being confirmed.
But groups on the right are wondering what else might be out there. They are "playing a wait-and-see game," said Robert Alt, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation and deputy director for its Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. "We're looking at a thumbnail sketch of Sotomayor. Much more will come out of the hearings. If more of the same comes out of the hearings -- more statements that express this sort of extreme view of identity politics, this view that judges can be making policy from the bench -- it will make it much more difficult for red-state Democrats to support her nomination. This is a question that only time will tell."
Continue reading Conservative Groups See Tough Road Ahead.
We've barely begun this nomination process, but it's never too early to start thinking about the next one.
In a briefing Thursday with a small group of columnists, President Obama's senior adviser David Axelrod gave a sneak peak into the potential nominees Obama may tap if he gets a second chance. In discussing the administration's reasons for choosing Sonia Sotomayor, Axelrod praised the other finalists and said the president had made a case for each one.
"It wouldn't at all surprise me if some of the very same people were back in the Oval Office talking to him," if he gets another choice, Axelrod said.
Axelrod did not go into detail as to which specific finalists he was referring to, but in an earlier briefing Tuesday after the announcement, the White House said the other frontrunners who had a personal interview with Obama were Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Judge Diane Wood.
Sonia Sotomayor will start informal meetings with senators next week, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said today.
She will meet Tuesday with Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., Gibbs said. He added that a meeting with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was also being set up. "We are hopeful other visits can be rescheduled for Tuesday and the rest of the week," Gibbs said. Obama has said he hopes Sotomayor is confirmed to replace retiring Justice David Souter before the Supreme Court reconvenes in early October.
From CongressDaily's "Final Word" section:
"Naturally, all of the groups on both sides have been knocking on the door. I mean, I have to admit both sides are very forceful. I can't tell you how obnoxious both sides can become from time to time."
-- Senate Judiciary member Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, speaking this morning on National Public Radio.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read today's PM issue here.
Of all the interest groups the Obama White House met with during its Supreme Court nomination process, at least one of them was conservative.
Federalist Society Executive Vice President Leonard Leo told NationalJournal.com that a member of the group's senior management team, Dean Reuter, attended a White House briefing May 19. Representatives from the American Constitution Society, American Bar Association, Minority Corporate Counsel Association and Association of Corporate Counsel were also there, we've learned; the White House has not released a full list.
This is one of at least three meetings involving the White House in the weeks before President Obama introduced Sonia Sotomayor as his high court nominee. One of them brought together several heavyweight left-leaning groups, including the Alliance for Justice, People for the American Way and the AFL-CIO; in another, several minority bar associations, including those representing Hispanics, Asian-Americans and Native Americans, discussed the nomination with officials as part of an annual meeting.
Right-leaning groups have been scarce. As for left-leaners, the New York Times reported Thursday that the White House had a specific message for them: They were told "not to lobby for their favorites in the news media or talk down candidates they opposed. The message, as one surprised visitor heard it, was 'get on board or get out of the way.'"
The Federalist Society typically stays out of nomination battles and wouldn't be expected to share this administration's judicial views in any case, but it has a longstanding, influential role in conservative politics that might have been a factor for the White House. On Monday, for instance, the group is hosting a luncheon with Alabama Republican and Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Jeff Sessions.
Vice President Joe Biden says President Obama "hit a home run" by nominating Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. In an e-mail to supporters, Biden lauds Sotomayor's legal and personal experience and asks supporters to get engaged -- and of course donate -- by going to Organizing For America's Web site.
"Please join me in becoming a part of this historic moment for the Court and our country," Biden writes in the e-mail. "Add your name now to publicly show that you, too, 'Stand with Sotomayor.' In these crucial early hours, let us leave no doubt about the people's support for this extraordinary nominee."
The vice president's team, including Chief of Staff Ron Klain and counsel Cynthia Hogan, has been instrumental in the nomination process and will continue to be leading up to and through the confirmation hearings. Even though he was standing next to Obama and Sotomayor at the announcement on Tuesday, Biden hasn't spoken out on his own regarding the nomination -- until his e-mail.
This is an early sign that the administration plans to rally its online base leading up to the confirmation hearings. Obama introduced Sotomayor to Organizing For America supporters on Tuesday. But, relatively speaking, the White House was slow in taking this fight online. Interest groups were prepping a few weeks ago, Democratic lawmakers jumped all over the announcement via Twitter, and other groups wasted no time launching ads either praising or attacking Sotomayor.
Guides for past Supreme Court nominees say the key to success in the Senate is for the court pick to make a personal connection with senators -- whether it be a common bond over baseball or an alma mater. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn, who joined Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., as one of only two women on the Senate Judiciary Committee this year, said in an interview with NationalJournal.com that she's already identified just such a bond with Sonia Sotomayor: an encyclopedia set.
At his Tuesday announcement of Sotomayor's nomination, President Obama noted that the Bronx native's mom "bought the only set of encyclopedias in the neighborhood" to help educate her daughter. That detail struck Klobuchar, who grew up in middle-class Minneapolis suburb. "I love that part," the first-term senator said this week. "The encyclopedia, that was in a hallowed place in our house."
Like Sotomayor, Klobuchar is also a former local prosecutor, so she said she's looking forward to talking about criminal law and sentencing guidelines with the Supreme Court nominee. "The fact that she's been a prosecutor is very helpful," Klobuchar said. "When you've been in that kind of job, the law to you is not just a dusty book in your mom's basement."
Klobuchar said she prefers to focus on "common sense" questions that reflect her prosecutorial background -- on issues like victim rights, for example. But she said that if Republicans on the committee don't give Sotomayor enough of a chance to defend herself, she's not afraid to step in. "If it gets into a partisan circus, then we're into a different land," she said. As an example, Klobuchar cited a recent appellate court nominee who she thought was not given enough time by a Republican questioner to explain his decisions. Klobuchar used her turn on the dais to give him a chance to clarify his reasoning.
That said, Klobuchar added that she's not just going to play defense; she's got her own questions for the nominee. "How she views executive power -- I think that's going to be a key issue," Klobuchar said.
Hispanic interest groups are headed to the Senate in support of Sonia Sotomayor's nomination, and not for the first time. In 1998, after Sotomayor's nomination to the appellate court level had languished in the Senate for more than a year, a coalition of legal and community groups began to complain that Hispanic judicial nominees were being held up for much longer than non-Hispanics.
Lauren Bell, a political science professor at Randolph-Macon College in Ashland, Va., who was a visiting fellow on the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, said that empirically it was true that Hispanic nominations took longer to get through the Republican-controlled Senate. "The Republicans said it wasn't about them being Hispanic, it was about them being activists," Bell said.
Nonetheless, the Hispanic National Bar Association and other groups undertook a major lobbying effort. Ramona Romero, president of the Hispanic National Bar Association, was head of the organization's District of Columbia affiliate at the time. "A group of the Hispanic leaders who are interested in a fair, diverse and independent judiciary took notice of the fact that the Senate was not performing its duty to advise and consent in a fair and appropriate way, and we did take notice and we did act on it," she said.
Their personal appeals and visits to senators attracted the attention of New York Republican Alfonse D'Amato -- who was up for reelection that year. In an interview this week, D'Amato said he appealed to Senate leaders to bring Sotomayor and other Hispanic nominees to a vote. "I really did push for it because she had strong support from the legal community as well as the Hispanic community," D'Amato said.
Continue reading Hispanic Groups: Been There, Done That.
The Judicial Confirmation Network pushed back today after White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., downplayed Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's comments in 2005 at Duke University about appellate judges making policy from the bench. Gibbs said critics were taking Sotomayor's words "out of context."
At Duke, Sotomayor said: "Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know, and I know this is on tape and I should never say that, because we don't make law, I know.... I'm not promoting it, and I'm not advocating it.... Having said that, the Court of Appeals is where, before the Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating."
Read more about this over at NationalJournal.com's Under The Influence blog.
The Senate Judiciary Committee released the questionnaire it has asked Sonia Sotomayor to fill out leading up to her confirmation hearings.
Read the 10-page questionnaire here.
The first advertising skirmish between liberals and conservatives began today over President Obama's nomination to promote 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.
The liberal Coalition for Constitutional Values launched a 30-second television spot that will run on network and cable news programs promoting Sotomayor's qualifications to succeed retiring Justice David Souter. A coalition spokesman called the ad "a solid six-figure buy" that will run initially for a week. The coalition includes the Alliance for Justice, People for the American Way and Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
From conservatives, the Judicial Confirmation Network started running an Internet ad critical of her nomination. The ad is directed at highly trafficked Web sites and about 6 million conservative activists, the group said.
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read the rest of the story here.
If you've been following the nomination news as closely as NationalJournal.com, you may have noticed that the lawyer-bloggers over at SCOTUSblog have been analyzing Sonia Sotomayor's opinions since May 15. You can find those posts those posts here and here and here and here and here and finally, posted at 7:34 a.m. yesterday, here.
So why did SCOTUSblog decide to focus on Sotomayor substantially more than other front-runners such as Elena Kagan or Diane Wood?
According to Tom Goldstein, founder of the blog and partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer and Feld, Sotomayor always "seemed like the logical political choice." Predictions like this -- he said he did a similar analysis of John Roberts leading up to his nomination in 2005 -- aren't "that complicated."
One last-minute assurance Goldstein had came from comments Obama made over the weekend that he was looking for a judge who had more than "ivory tower learning."
"It seemed to me that it was going to be really hard to explain" Kagan and Wood in light of that comment, Goldstein said. "They're really smart and good people, but their strengths don't come from personal experiences. The president was signaling that he was headed in the direction of Sotomayor."
It wasn't smooth sailing the whole time. Soon after Goldstein published his last post about Sotomayor early Tuesday morning effectively predicting wholeheartedly that she was going to be the pick, he got an e-mail saying the rumored pick was 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Ann Williams. His initial thought? "I'm an idiot." Not in the end.
Updated at 9:45 a.m. on May 27.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs spent more than three minutes today explaining away a short YouTube clip in which Sonia Sotomayor says appeals courts make policy -- before clarifying that she's not "advocating" that idea.
"We don't make law, I know. OK, I know. I know. I'm not promoting it, I'm not advocating it," she says in a 2005 panel discussion at Duke University after noting the session was being videotaped. The most popular version of the clip began Tuesday morning with approximately 20,000 views but has since shot past 140,000. And it's become fodder on conservative Web sites such as the Judicial Confirmation Network.
Gibbs dismissed the video, saying "the president is very convinced that people will look at the full context of this and not rely on, as I said, a small, short, out-of-context YouTube clip."
Watch both videos after the jump.
Continue reading Gibbs Responds To YouTube Clip.
Updated at 8:37 a.m. on May 26.
The New York Times is reporting that President Obama will announce Sonia Sotomayor as his nominee for the Supreme Court at 10:15 a.m.
Will President Obama be bringing some SCOTUS-related material along with him to Camp David for Memorial Day weekend? Perhaps, according to press secretary Robert Gibbs.
"I think he's looking forward to spending Memorial Day weekend with his family," Gibbs said during today's press briefing. "I don't doubt that he'll take some reading along with him, and work on his selection."
Meanwhile, criticism is mounting against appellate judge and short-lister Diane Wood. National Review's Ed Whelan -- who has written several posts criticizing Wood -- offered a summary argument against her this morning. Later, he followed up with yet another post contrasting her position on military commissions with Obama's.
Wood has received praise, though, from experts on the left and right of the political spectrum. Doug Kendall, president of the progressive Constitutional Accountability Center, calls her an "intellectual leader on one of the best courts of appeals in the country." National Journal's own Stuart Taylor Jr. wrote on this blog yesterday that Wood's "judicial record has won the respect of conservative as well as liberal colleagues and many other experts as well."
Republicans, meanwhile, are gearing up for whoever awaits them at the confirmation hearings. Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., announced today that Elisebeth Cook will be his chief counsel for Supreme Court nominations. Per CQ's Legal Beat, Cook was an assistant attorney general at the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy during the George W. Bush administration.
Something else to watch out for after the long weekend: On Tuesday, the California Supreme Court will hand down its decision on whether or not to uphold Proposition 8, the ban on gay marriage. Observers believe this decision could influence the confirmation hearings and trigger more questioning over the nominee's record on gay rights. The Volokh Conspiracy blog has some thoughts on this issue.
A handful of minority bar associations met with White House officials last week to discuss nominating a person of color to the high court.
The discussion took place at the Coalition of Bars of Color annual conference, and NationalJournal.com has confirmed that the National Native American Bar Association, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, and the Hispanic National Bar Association all took part in the meeting.
The meeting came after bar associations representing Asian Americans and Native Americans sent letters to the White House urging the administration to nominate someone coming from their respective demographics.
Both letters include names of people the groups deem qualified for the high court, such as John Echohawk, executive director of the Native American Rights Fund, and Susan Oki Mollway, a federal district judge in Hawaii. But while the administration officials seemed open to the groups' concerns, they would not discuss any specific candidates in the meeting, said National Native American Bar Association President Heather Thompson.
While there has been much discussion of the possibility of nominating a Hispanic or African American, Asian and Native American interests have gone largely unheard. Thompson said this was the first such letter her organization has sent regarding a high court nomination. "Other associations have been more organized about putting names forward," she said.
"While much of America is underrepresented on the Supreme Court, the U.S. has never appointed an individual indigenous to this country to its Supreme Court," the letter from the Native American group states. It goes on to emphasize that there "is not a single Native on the federal bench in the entire country, and to the best of our knowledge there has never been a Native American Supreme Court clerk." Thompson added, however, that "we would support any person of color that was put forward on the bench."
The Women's Bar Association of D.C. also sent a letter to Obama Thursday urging him to appoint a woman.
In another sign that abortion is sticking around as a Supreme Court sticking point, Americans United for Life sent a letter to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning highlighting a new poll that touched on issues related to some short-listers.
Four poll questions highlighted positions or actions taken by Solicitor General Elena Kagan, outgoing Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears, Stanford Law School professor Kathleen Sullivan and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick. Other questions touch on broader topics, such as using tax dollars to pay for abortions in the U.S. or abroad. The poll found consistent support for abortion opponents' side in each case -- except for the 57 percent who approved of "buffer zones" keeping protesters at a distance from clinics, an issue identified with Patrick.
Asked for a comment, Ted Miller, communications director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, wasn't surprised the issue is being pushed. "Discussion about the right to privacy will be a part of the Supreme Court nomination process, as it has been in previous nominations," he said. "What's important to note is that, time and time again, Americans have consistently said they want the court to uphold Roe v. Wade."
The poll was conducted in mid-May by the Polling Company, a private organization whose political clients tend to be right-leaning.
The short list may be getting shorter, but the long list is only getting longer. As President Obama continues his secretive vetting of potential SCOTUS nominees, legal scholars and media observers are throwing out even more possibilities. These may not be household names, but they offer qualities currently lacking on the high court -- or so the arguments go.
The National Law Journal's Marcia Coyle sought out more than a dozen Supreme Court and constitutional law experts to get their take on whom Obama should nominate. While nearly all agreed it would be a good idea for the president to pick a woman or minority, they also suggested some "off-the-grid" white male candidates.
After the jump is an addendum to our "long list" including these contenders as well as several dark horses named in an NPR story this weekend. Click here for the full list. Know someone who has been rumored as a possible candidate but who's not on this list? E-mail Amy Harder.
Continue reading New Names In SCOTUS Long List.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, rumored to be in the running for the Supreme Court nomination, is keeping mum on her chances. Over breakfast with a roomful of reporters in Washington this morning, the former Arizona governor was asked about the current speculation. "What's it like to be on the short list?" a reporter queried.
Napolitano smiled, looked down at her plate and replied, "Man. These are really good eggs."
Once the laughter had subsided, the secretary moved on to a question about the release of Guantanamo Bay detainees into the United States.
The Judicial Confirmation Network has launched three new online ads and a Web site targeting three of President Obama's reported Supreme Court short-listers: appellate judges Diane Wood and Sonia Sotomayor and Solicitor General Elena Kagan.
The videos -- one for each potential nominee -- offer a glimpse into what conservatives could use as ammo if one of these three is the president's first high court pick. The Web site www.obamasfrontrunners.com, which launched today, asks visitors to vote for "which frontrunner is the worst liberal judicial activist," a common theme in criticism from the right.
The ads are not actually running on TV or radio; they are primarily serving to drive traffic to the organization's Web site, according to a group spokesperson.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said that while it is "premature" to predict what will happen with President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, it's also too early to close the door on the possibility of a Republican-led filibuster. "Under the rules of the Senate, all things are possible," the Kentucky Republican said on "Fox News Sunday."
Subscribers to CongressDaily can read the entire story here.
Updated at 10:03 p.m. on May 17.
Short-lister Diane Wood is attending the annual meeting of the 7th Circuit Bar Association and 7th Circuit Judicial Conference at the Westin Hotel in Indianapolis on Sunday. Meanwhile, President Obama will be attending two Democratic fundraisers at the Westin the same day. Coincidence?
Yes, a White House official said Friday afternoon: "The visit has nothing to do with the selection process."
The White House has included Wood, currently an appellate judge for the 7th Circuit, on its short list of candidates to replace Justice David Souter. National Journal's Stuart Taylor Jr. ranks Wood third on his list.
Updated at 9:28 a.m. on May 15.
President Obama met with Senate leaders on Wednesday to discuss the Supreme Court vacancy, but that wasn't the only place the administration was seeking counsel. At least eight progressive groups, including the AFL-CIO, People for the American Way and the National Council of La Raza, also met with administration officials to discuss what they're looking for in a nominee. The White House would not confirm which groups were in attendance, but NationalJournal.com has learned that the list included:
• AFL-CIO
• Alliance for Justice
• Asian American Justice Center
• National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
• National Council of La Raza
• National Partnership of Women and Families
• National Women's Law Center
• People for the American Way
According to a White House official, the administration plans to "meet with senators on both sides of the aisle and a diverse array of organizations not limited to the left or the right." But the staffer declined to comment on any specific plans to hold a similar meeting with right-leaning groups.
A spokesperson for CRC Public Relations, a firm representing groups such as Americans United for Life and the Judicial Confirmation Network, said she was unaware of any outreach so far from the administration. And Leonard Leo, executive vice president of the Federalist Society, said that his organization has not been contacted by the White House and that he was unaware Wednesday's meeting had taken place.
Following a meeting today between President Obama and Senate leaders regarding the upcoming Supreme Court nomination, Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., released a statement denouncing "some right-wing interest groups" that he says have "already begun a smoke and mirrors campaign against the president's nominee, whoever it may be."
"I trust that Republican senators, and all senators, will honor their constitutional obligation, and will elevate a nominee on his or her merits, not on the campaigns of any narrow-minded interest group," Leahy said. While the chairman didn't specifically call out any group, a committee spokesperson directed NationalJournal.com to a media report that focused primarily on the Judicial Confirmation Network.
Leahy's statement comes on the heels of a broader comment yesterday by White House press secretary Robert Gibbs about advocacy groups and the nomination process. "I don't think that the lobbying of interest groups will help," Gibbs said. "I think in many ways lobbying can -- and will -- be counterproductive."
In response to Leahy's statement, Judicial Confirmation Network executive director Gary Marx said that the senator "should be more concerned about Democratic senators who in the past have strongly heard our vision of the court following judicial restraint." He referred specifically to red state Democrats such as Ben Nelson, D-Neb., Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who voted to confirm John Roberts in 2005. These Democrats "have heard the arguments we've made before and have supported our view and the view of mainstream Americans that we need justices who follow judicial restraint, not judicial activism," Marx said. He added that Leahy voted in favor of Roberts as well.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., refused today to agree to Republican demands for at least 60 days between the nomination of a Supreme Court justice and the opening of hearings in the Judiciary Committee. "No arbitrary deadlines," Reid said after a meeting with President Obama to discuss the nomination.
But Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said he would work with Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., to work out an acceptable timetable. "I'm not going to drag my feet in the Judiciary Committee but I'm also going to make sure that everybody -- Republicans and Democrats -- [has] a chance to ask good questions." Sessions and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., were also in the meeting. McConnell said it was a general discussion, with no specific names discussed.
Updated on May 19.
The Ninth Justice is tracking all the names swirling around as possible Supreme Court nominees to replace retiring Justice David Souter. As this list grows, we will update the list in alphabetical order. Want to submit a possible nominee? E-mail Amy Harder at aharder@nationaljournal.com.
Anita Alvarez, Cook County State's Attorney
• Age: 52
• Education: Loyola University in Chicago, 1982; Chicago-Kent College of Law, 1986.
• Ethnicity: Hispanic
• Her Cook County biography can be found here.
Christine M. Arguello, U.S. District Court, District of Colorado
• Age: 53
• Education: University of Colorado, 1977; Harvard Law School, 1980
• Ethnicity: Hispanic
• Her court biography can be found here.
Ruben Castillo, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
• Age: 54
• Education: Loyola University, Chicago, Ill., 1976; Northwestern University School of Law, 1979.
• Ethnicity: Hispanic
• His court biography can be found here.
Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State
• Age: 61
• Education: Wellesley College, 1969; Yale Law School, 1973.
• Ethnicity: white
• Her State Department biography can be found here and her National Journal profile here.
James B. Comey, former deputy attorney general in George W. Bush's administration
• Age: 48
• Education: College of William and Mary, B.S., 1982; University of Chicago Law School, J.D., 1985
• Ethnicity: white
• His biography at Lockheed Martin, where he is currently senior vice president and general counsel, can be found here.
Nora V. Demleitner, Dean of Hofstra University Law School
• Age: 42
• Education: Bates College, 1989; Yale Law School, 1992; Georgetown University Law Center, 1994
• Ethnicity: white
• Her Hofstra University Law School biography can be found here.
JoAnne A. Epps, Dean of Temple University Beasley School of Law
• Education: Trinity College; Yale Law School
• Ethnicity: African American
• Her Temple University biography can be found here.
Dana Fabe, Alaska Supreme Court Chief Justice
• Age: 58
• Education: Cornell University, B.A., 1973; Northeastern University School of Law, 1976.
• Ethnicity: white
Her court biography can be found here.
Continue reading The Long List: Justice Souter's Replacement.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said today he does not expect Republicans to filibuster President Obama's nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter.
"There aren't enough Republicans to do that," Reid said during an appearance on NBC's "Today" show. "I would also say this: The Republicans, when they put up this big battle on the nuclear option, one of their reasons for doing this is that they didn't believe that judges should be filibustered. So I don't know how they could do that intellectually, now come back and try to filibuster a judge." Reid was referring to threats by Senate Republicans when they were in the majority to declare that filibusters on judicial and other nominations were unconstitutional.
President Obama confirmed today that Supreme Court Justice David Souter will retire and said he hopes to have a replacement confirmed by the time the court begins its new session on the first Monday of October.
Obama interrupted a briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to make the announcement.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy praised Souter for having "served the nation with distinction for nearly two decades on the Supreme Court. I have admired his commitment to justice, his admiration for the law, and his understanding of the impact of the Court's decisions on the daily lives of ordinary Americans."
Subscribers can read the full story here .
