Sherrilyn A. Ifill
The Root
As confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor begin before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, it’s probably best to keep some perspective on the significance of the proceedings.
Unless there’s a violent crime in her past, Judge Sotomayor will be confirmed as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Given Al Franken’s recent seating as the 60th Democratic vote in the Senate, it’s a numerical certainty that a nominee approved by Democrats will be confirmed. This reality will not stop Republicans from doing their best to drag Judge Sotomayor’s name through the mud and to paint her as a dangerous, racially driven, judicial activist.
In fact, Republicans have been “workshopping” their Sotomayor strategy over the past two weeks, staging mini-rehearsals in an attempt to figure out which tactic will most excite their base, not alienate Latino voters and refocus the seriously adrift Republican Party. Parts have been handed out to key players on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, is to bring the intellectual challenge. He’s been practicing with a cleverly conceived “Daily Question for Judge Sotomayor” on his Web site. Many of the questions posed are surprisingly substantive, and the explanatory text that accompanies each question is a good way to get his constituents and sympathetic journalists up to speed on the dynamics of Republican resistance to Judge Sotomayor’s nomination.
| Enough |
July 13th, 2009 1:28 pm ET What Judgement? The Democrats are pushing through everything and everyone they want. Their like a runaway freight train, taking out everything in it's path. The only reason Sotomayor was even nominated is because she is a Latina woman. More Obama pandering. |
|
| Janet Bertinot |
July 13th, 2009 2:18 pm ET I suspect that the most enlightening part of these hearings will be the public exposure of the petty nature of the Republican Senators – do these fellows ( I noticed no female senators in their ranks on this committee) – really think they are sounding "impartial" and "regarding the value of the nominee based on the facts" ? If so, they are sorely mistaken and need to try to watch themselves on the replay. So much posturing, so much talk about other past nominees, so much unexpressed resentment at the wave of change that is already happening in the society that they supposedly represent. This is just more playing to that lowest, fearful, angry portion of the US that began to be seduced by the McCain-Palin campaign. These embers have never cooled off – the opening of a Pandora's box, indeed, and that, combined with the real threats to personal survival in the economy, et al, are edging this country into a police state far removed from the concepts that created the Constitution. |
|
| Joanne Pacicca |
July 13th, 2009 2:41 pm ET I disagree. The Democrats are not doing enough! The majority needs to exercise the new mandates of the people that elected them. Sotomayor should be confirmed only if she is the best candidate for the position. It's too easy to fall into the reverse discrimination accusation. |
|
| BHO - fan |
July 13th, 2009 2:44 pm ET It takes PANDERING TO KNOW PANDERING! |
|
| Janine from PA. |
July 13th, 2009 2:48 pm ET I can't believe how full of themselves the congresspeople are. Stop yapping and do a quick hearing and vote, save the taxpayers some money for once. |
|
| A.J. |
July 13th, 2009 3:33 pm ET "This is just more playing to that lowest, fearful, angry portion of the US that began to be seduced by the McCain-Palin campaign" Well, I guess that makes me the "lowest, fearful, angry" portion of the U.S. then. Do you even know any McCain voters? . "These embers have never cooled off – the opening of a Pandora’s box, indeed, and that, combined with the real threats to personal survival in the economy, et al, are edging this country into a police state far removed from the concepts that created the Constitution" If no white people passed a test, should the results be thrown out? Of course not. But in the case Sotomayor ruled in, it was treated differently, based on race. That's called racism and unfortunantly it still exists. |
|
| Stacy L |
July 13th, 2009 3:52 pm ET You would think that Republicans would be glad to have a SCOTUS nominee be a judge who has the record of agreeing 95% of the time with her conservative collegues. However, since she was presented by a Democratic president – Obama who they hate – they are choosing to blindly fight her. It makes no sense to me. Hey, whatever floats their boat, I guess. |
|
| Lampe |
July 13th, 2009 4:50 pm ET What in the world does any of this have to do with McCain\Palin? Some here can not go a day without running their names through the mud. I can only hope that I live long enough to see the favor returned, when Democrats no longer run everytihing. |
|
| RLWellman |
July 13th, 2009 4:56 pm ET Why is it the Democrats think it is okay to approve a "far left judge" that uses reverse-discrimination. If they would into her past, they don't need the Republicans to tell them that. She is a Democrat and that's all that matters to them. It's funny how Bush nominated two judges that were turned down by the Democrats because they were too conservative. Is this what Americans want? Someone who doesn't follow the law, but judges by feelings? |
|
| michael Best |
July 13th, 2009 7:18 pm ET Hon. Sonia Sotomayor, made a decision in my civil court case, where she was the third deciding signature on a five judge Panel, she voted to dismiss my Civil case where i requested counsel do to my mental |
|
| michael Best |
July 13th, 2009 7:23 pm ET On May 13 2009 Hon Judge Sonia Sotomayor made the final vote to denie me a right to counsel, on july 2nd 2009, i entered the motion for reconsideration, which is now being view by Hon. Sotomayor, and i believe she should answer the motion before the outcome of her hearing, |
|
| Lampe |
July 13th, 2009 9:36 pm ET Is this the first time any of you ever paid attention to Confirmation Hearings? Both sides do the samething whenever anyone is picked to become a SCJ. Stop acting like The Republicans are the only ones doing this. The Democrats have had their fair share of running Republican picks into the ground. Turn-about is fair play. Maybe if you paid more attention to all things, instead of just the negative things about Republicans you would have a better understanding of how all of them play these types of games. |
|
| Michael Schumann |
July 13th, 2009 9:50 pm ET I watched the hearing for a bit and I thought that Sessions and some of the other Republicans made royal fools of themselves. I have to wonder if Sessions has forgotten the long and dirty history of crooked Judges and skewed "justice" that has prevailed and still occurs far too often in the South. Many of the men they celebrate as great legalistic mind were intolerant bigots of the most extreme type. As Alabama was still at it in the 1960's and '70s, he can hardly claim a lifetime of experience with "fair" and/or "impartial" judges. Clearly, they have decided to go gunning for Sotomayor and could care less about her extensive experience or judicial acumen. |
|
| Annie Kate |
July 13th, 2009 10:15 pm ET In a confirmation hearing there is enough time and opportunity for all parties to show their less than positive sides. Our Congress, despite what party they are affiliated with, will focus on the lowest common denominator and proceed to make fools of themselves – seems to be the only thing they do well. You cannot base confirmation on a judge on the basis of one court case – the whole body of her cases must be looked at and the common themes discovered. There is always a case that will be an exception to the rule because we have such variety in this country. |
|
| Joyce Link |
July 13th, 2009 11:16 pm ET I retired from nursing 10 years ago. It's been a while since I saw a room full of old men and women slobbering all over themselves. |
|
| CQuintana |
July 13th, 2009 11:43 pm ET I believe that character matters in both professional and personal endeavors; There is something not right with her so I would vote NO! As a Latino man I would not have her as my judge, teacher, mother-in-law or wife. I’m not even sure I would hire her as my lawyer! |
|
|
Comments have been closed for this article |
||
A behind the scenes look at “Anderson Cooper 360°” and the stories it covers, written by Anderson Cooper, the AC360° staff and a network of contributors. Insight you can’t find anywhere else.
We search the news each day to show you what’s on our radar and what we’re planning for the show each night.
For more details, read our tips on how to win 360° approval for comments.
Send your instant feedback to Anderson Cooper 360°.
- Raw Data: Youth violence in the U.S.
- Your year in 30 seconds
- Video: Teens' world explodes in brawl
- Husband of missing Utah woman to be interviewed today
- Holy Jihad, Batman! Al-Qaeda Offers Condolences?
- Tonight's show
- Dear President Obama #329: Back to work ... thank heavens
- Theme of the '00s? Unpaid bills
- Can Obama bully the bankers?
- The Top 10 Everything of 2009
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2005

