The U.S. Senate confirmed Judge Sonia Sotomayor today, in a 68-31 vote.

Bill Mears
CNN Supreme Court Producer

With Sonia Sotomayor soon to fulfill her long-held dream to sit on the Supreme Court, she will have the prestige of joining the highest court in the land, lifetime job security, and a public forum as the first Hispanic on that bench.

Her formal swear-in will be Saturday morning at the high court, with Chief Justice John Roberts administering the judicial oath.

The 55-year-old judge now has the opportunity to become a influential force among her new colleagues, a legal pioneer who could help shape the law and its effect on society in any number of ways. But such a legacy will not come easily and it certainly will not come quickly. The internal dynamics of a body built on tradition and stability have long discouraged swift and sweeping forces that are regularly felt in the other branches of government, and society at large.

After her Thursday confirmation by the Senate, Sotomayor will become the junior justice, someone with the least seniority but no less authority than her eight benchmates. She brings with her a bit of history, and is sure to be the focus of public attention and political scrutiny.

"It's a step forward for the country. Having someone who's in a permanent lifetime appointment at the highest levels of the government who has this background, both economically and ethnically, is a big deal, it's a moment," said Thomas Goldstein, co-founder of ScotusBlog (at scotusblog.com) who has argued before the justices as a private attorney.

"The idea that a Democratic president did this and embraced them in this way will not be forgotten," he added.

After her swearing in, which will be attended by a small group of family and friends, Sotomayor will quickly set up shop in her high court chambers. She will have a staff of aides and secretaries, as well as four law clerks to help her jump into the caseload.

The urgency may be especially acute for her. The high court has scheduled an oral argument for an important campaign finance reform case for September 9, in the middle of its traditional summer recess, and almost a month before the justices normally begin their new term. She will have to cram in order to hear the case with her colleagues– no grace period or expanded learning curve.

Justice Stephen Breyer has said it took him a few years on the high court before he felt truly comfortable in the job, and he had already served as an appeals judge for 14 years before his elevation. It is a sentiment echoed by other justices on the high court - where the caseload, the pace of meeting deadlines, and the sheer enormity of the issues facing the court can seem initially overwhelming.

Her colleagues are sure to warmly welcome their newest member, but she will soon find herself on her own. A myth of the court is that the justices operate as a unified bunch. The reality is that they are like nine little kingdoms, free to rule - on the cases before them and in their own chambers - as they see fit. Their work entails lots of reading, researching, and writing - most of it alone in front of a computer, maybe a writing pad, even typewriter.

No wonder the seeming glamour of sitting on the Supreme Court often gives way to a sense of isolation and loneliness for new justices. "When you put on the black robe, the experience is sobering," the late Justice Lewis Powell once remarked. "It makes you more thoughtful."

Powell said the biggest surprise when he joined the high court was how the justices communicated about the cases. Memos, mostly formal in tone and presentation, remain the norm. Phone calls from one justice to another are relatively rare; personal visits to chambers even more unusual. E-mails are not embraced, even in the digital age.

But such interaction is key. After oral arguments on a case, the court votes on it, a justice is assigned at conference to write a majority opinion, another to write a dissent. The goal is to craft a majority ruling that will command the support of all the colleagues on a particular side, since that would create a unified front and make it easier to establish lasting precedent guiding future courts. That's where personal relationships matter.

Individual justices monitor what their colleagues are doing, collaborating to varying degrees on the language and scope of opinions, negotiating and engaging in a give-and-take. Sandra Day O'Connor in particular, before her retirement in 2006, was known inside the court for her backstage persuasiveness, while building a national persona as the first female justice.

"The justices learn about each other's views on the law and the Constitution, their strengths, their personalities," said Edward Lazarus, who wrote "Closed Chambers," an inside look at the court. "But that takes time. Justices Breyer and O'Connor became close colleagues on the bench because they discovered a similar approach to deciding cases, but that developed slowly over several years. Justices (Ruth Bader) Ginsburg and (Antonin) Scalia are very close personally - they have similar intellectual and musical interests - and you can't help but think that has helped bridge some disagreements in some cases, despite their deep differences on the law."

Developing and nurturing that trust among differing personalities is not easy. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once described Supreme Court deliberations as "nine scorpions in a bottle," fiercely protective in carving out their own agendas and power bases.

By all accounts, the current court as a group gets along very well personally. They like each other, and each can appreciate the diverse, often tough road each took to get to where they are. They all know how exclusive is the club to which they have gained entry, how random and unpredictable was their nomination.

Yet this remains a profoundly divided court ideologically. A shaky conservative majority - roughly four liberals and five conservatives, with Justice Anthony Kennedy often a swing vote - has produced a simmering tension inside the marble walls of the court. As a presumed member of the progressive faction, Sotomayor could find herself on the losing end of many a fight over hot-button issues in the near future, relegating her to writing dissents.

She will operate in the shadow of Justice John Paul Stevens – at 89, the oldest member of the court and the undisputed leader of his liberal colleagues. That authority is built on his nearly 40 years of seniority, his quiet skills as a tactician, and his sharp writing prowess. Many liberal legal activists hope Sotomayor eventually follows the O'Connor model in crafting a power base inside and outside the court.

As a group, the justices have wide experience. All served as federal appeals court judges, so they know well the intricacies of interpreting constitutional and legislative precedent. "They are well-prepared, active, informed, engaged, with tough questioning (of lawyers) from the bench," said David Garrow, a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and high court expert.

But the current court has by no means become a predictable group.

One vote can tip the delicate ideological balance. Of the 79 full opinions issued last term, 23 were 5-4 votes, or about 29 percent. Most involved major issues such as workplace discrimination, broadcast indecency and DNA testing.

Kennedy's views often proved decisive, and his influence remains undimmed.

Sotomayor will quickly discover the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts has not shied from taking on tough, timely cases. The fall 2009 docket includes appeals on religious displays on public land, Miranda rights, life sentences for underage criminals, and international child abductions.

This judicial confidence, said Garrow, gives "this court no second thoughts that it knows better than anyone else, especially the Congress, what is right."

Sotomayor will leave behind her family and friends in her native New York. She is not married, and observers say her work as a judge consumes much of her life. Colleagues say she has managed to find time for herself and pursue interests off the bench, but she has admitted that has not been an easy balance to maintain.

Lazarus, a former law clerk for Justice Harry Blackmun, remembered his former boss "carved out for himself a distinctly solitary existence. From 8 to 9 every morning, Blackmun would breakfast with us clerks in the court cafeteria," he remembered. "But as 9 o'clock approached, the justice's attitude and demeanor changed radically. As he shifted into work mode, Blackmun became unapproachable, a man consumed by a mantle of professional duty that fairly seemed to crush him."

While Blackmun was known by his colleagues for a prickly personality, his sense of struggling to live up to the responsibilities of the job rings familiar.

Sotomayor will bring a unique life experience - personally and professionally - to the job. She comes to it at a time of significant political and social change. The justice will have just one vote, and one voice. Whether she will thrive in the long run at her new home will depend to a large extent on her intellect, work ethic, and interpersonal skills.

But forces outside her control - namely the future ideological makeup of the court and the unforeseen hot-button issues that will confront her - will ultimately shape the legacy she will leave.

After being confirmed by the Senate today, Sonia Sotomayor will be the first latino on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Maria Hinojosa
Special to CNN

It's a question I never thought I would ask my daughter. But I loved being able to ask it.

"Yurema?"

"Yes, Mom," my 11-year-old daughter said.

"Tell me what T-shirt you would most like to wear: one that says 'I am a Wise Latina,' 'My Mother is a Wise Latina' or 'Sonia is a Wise Latina'?"

She cocked her head slightly and then quickly said, "I am a Wise Latina."

Eleven years old, and this is the vision she already has of herself. It's a pretty wonderful thing to watch that certain something blossom in a girl ... one of those often fleeting moments when a girl owns her own power.

For me, the decision to wear my own "Wise Latina" T-shirt raises all kinds of issues.

Keep reading...

Judge Sonia Sotomayor answers questions from senators during confirmation hearings last week.

Ruben Navarrette Jr.
Special to CNN

Judge Sonia Sotomayor cruised through her confirmation hearings without a scratch.

Too bad we can't say the same about the seven Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee who tried to dent her credibility and wound up demolishing their own.

The problem wasn't that Republican senators challenged Sotomayor. That's their job. The problem was that they did their job in such an obsessive and boorish way so as to make clear to the entire country that they had no idea how to deal with someone like Sotomayor. Like when Tom Coburn of Oklahoma tried to be funny by pulling out his Ricky Ricardo accent and informing Sotomayor that she had "some 'splaining to do." All this talk about whether the nominee was ready for the senators, and the senators clearly weren't ready for the likes of her.

Keep reading...

David Puente
AC360° Producer

After so many questions about it, Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s now famous “wise Latina” quote will likely not keep her off the Supreme Court. All indications from Capitol Hill point to her confirmation as the 111th person to sit on that court next week.

Her quote got me thinking, and although I know the role of women is paramount in all ethnic groups, all societies throughout history, I can attest to the great tradition behind Judge Sotomayor’s words where I grew up.

Throughout my youth I was surrounded by hard working, dedicated, intelligent and wise, very wise Latinas. The women of my childhood’s immigrant neighborhood played a strong and central role in family and in community.

Today I look up to some wise Latinas who are my friends and fellow journalists – Rossana Rosado, CEO of El Diario La Prensa, our country’s oldest Spanish-language daily newspaper, and Mariela Dabbah, who specializes in writing about education and motivation.

CNN Español correspondent Adriana Hauser, spoke to Rosado, Dabbah and other wise Latinas about the wise Latinas in their lives…watch the video.

Follow David on Twitter @puenteac360.

Sotomayor won the Moses Taylor Pyne Prize, the highest honor given to an undergraduate at Princeton.

Elizabeth Landau
CNN

Sonia Sotomayor spent her first week at Princeton University obsessing over the sound of a cricket. Growing up in New York City, her only notion of this insect was Jiminy from "Pinocchio." She tore her dorm room apart looking for the critter every night.

Finally, her then-boyfriend and future husband visited and explained that the cricket was outside the room, where she had been holed up most of that week in 1972.

"This was all new to me: we didn't have trees brushing up against windows in the South Bronx," Sotomayor recalled in a speech to the Princeton Women's Network in 2002.

The freshman who was so taken aback by a cricket's chirping now has a more public challenge: Senate hearings on whether to confirm her as a Supreme Court justice, potentially the first Latina to hold such a post.

At one time, being different may have been difficult - for it wasn't just Princeton's crickets that startled Sotomayor. The academics and the students on the leafy Gothic campus, with its ivy-covered dormitories and castle-like towers, also made her feel out of place.

Keep reading...

At Princeton, Sotomayor co-founded the student group Accion Puertorriquena and spoke out about Latino issues.

Ruben Navarrette Jr.
Special to CNN

Sixteen years ago, after I wrote a memoir about my experience as a Latino in the Ivy League, I got a call from a retired Jewish obstetrician who saw his reflection in my words.

A book about being a Chicano at Harvard in the 1980s had stirred memories of being one of the few Jewish students at the University of Southern California in the 1930s.

Now, I feel like calling Sonia Sotomayor, although I realize that her schedule is crowded this week in light of the Senate confirmation hearings for the nominee to the Supreme Court.

I'd like Sotomayor to know that, even though she arrived at Princeton University in 1972 (the year I started kindergarten), I have a good idea what she went through in college - and, later, at Yale Law School - because many Latinos who later traveled that road experienced the same thing.

Keep reading

Sonia Sotomayor, here at her 8th-grade graduation, had to finish homework and chores before she could go out.

CNN

The following are past key rulings made by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, who begins a week long hearing in the senate judiciary committee on Monday.

Keep Reading...

Sonia Sotomayor speaks before the Senate Judiciary Committe on Tuesday, the second day of her hearings.

CNN

Sonia Sotomayor, if confirmed, would be the first Hispanic to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. But she has many things in common with the eight justices she would sit with.

Read More...

Judge Sonia Sotomayor speaks before the Senate Judiciary Committe on Tuesday, the second day of her hearings.

Laura E. Gómez
Special to CNN

It is likely that Judge Sotomayor will face some questions from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee this week about her 2001 "wise Latina" remark.

In a speech at a Berkeley conference on Hispanic judges, Sotomayor 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."

Her comment has been lampooned on the cover of the National Review, where cartoonists apparently could not quite fathom a wise Latina judge, choosing to portray Sotomayor as a Buddha with Asian features. It has caused Rush Limbaugh and others to label her a "racist," and it has caused even liberals to bristle.

I was a speaker at the conference Sotomayor's speech kicked off, and I would like to put her comment in context.

Keep reading...

Anderson Cooper and President Obama walking around Cape Coast Castle.

Charly Feldman
AC360° Intern

Tonight on 360°, watch Anderson’s exclusive interview with President Obama in Ghana. They discuss everything from the economy to Afghanistan, the U.S. military’s “Don’t ask don’t tell” for gay service members and of course U.S. policy towards Africa.

We’ll take you on a tour of the dungeons of Cape Coast Castle with President Obama, to see where kidnapped Ghanaians awaited the horrifying boat rides to America just a couple of centuries ago. Greed and the slave trade triangle – all this and more on the program tonight.

But slavery isn’t just a thing of the past. Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s joins us from Haiti with a 360° dispatch on modern day slavery. It’s hard to imagine, but children as young as four years old are caught up in this vicious cycle. We’re digging deeper.

Plus, Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings began today at Capitol Hill, as the Senate Judiciary Committee discusses her abilities as a potential Supreme Court judge. From accusations of judicial activism to her controversial comment about being a “wise Latina”, Candy Crowley brings you the raw politics tonight, with senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Also, Randi Kaye joins us live from L.A. with the latest details on Michael Jackson’s death. His sister LaToya is speaking out. We’ll have her controversial account of what she believes happened to Michael. Was he murdered? Or, as Joe Jackson now suggests did the prospects of his London concerts burn him out? Plus, we’re following the money trail. Tune in to 360° for the answer to these questions.

Join us at 10pm ET for all this and much more! See you then.

Sonia Sotomayor appears to view the Constitution much like retired Justice David Souter did.

Jeffrey Toobin
CNN Senior Analyst

One of the enduring myths about Supreme Court justices is that they often turn out to "surprise" the presidents who appoint them. Sure-thing conservatives, it is said, turn out to be liberals, ­and vice versa. In fact, the evidence is almost entirely the opposite: that with justices, as in life, what you see is what you get.

The question, then, is this: What do you see when you look at Sonia Sotomayor, who begins her confirmation hearings as a strong favorite for confirmation?

She is, above all, a veteran judge ­who has 18 years on the federal bench: six as a trial judge (appointed by President George H.W. Bush) and the rest on the court of appeals (appointed by President Clinton). The question of competence is closed. Sotomayor can do the job. It's no surprise that she received a unanimous rating of well-qualified from the American Bar Association screening committee.

But what would she stand for as a Supreme Court justice? She is, it seems, a liberal,­ but a liberal in the cautious and careful mode of her likely future colleagues Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

Keep reading...

Judge Sonia Sotomayor listens to opening statements Monday at her confirmation hearing.

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.

Read more...

Judge Sonia Sotomayor

Angelo Falcón
Special to CNN

The nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States has raised the profile of Puerto Ricans in the American consciousness.

Her identification as a Puerto Rican has caused Judge Sotomayor both joy and a little grief during this stormy nomination process. But, being a Puerto Rican who also grew up in New York City, well, I can say that's par for the course for most of us.

Despite Puerto Rico being a possession of the United States since 1898, most Americans know very little about the island and Puerto Ricans - except for tourism commercials. Many consider Puerto Ricans living in the United States outside of Puerto Rico (I called these "Stateside Puerto Ricans") another new immigrant group of Latinos.

But the reality is that we can trace Puerto Rican settlements in New Orleans to the 1860s and workers from Puerto Rico migrated to Hawaii around 1900. In 1917, through an act of the United States Congress (the Jones Act), the people of Puerto Rico were made United States citizens, enabling them to come to the United States freely and legally without passport or visa.

Keep reading...

Critics warn confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor could turn into a partisan battle.

Bill Mears
CNN Supreme Court Producer

These rulings or cases are from Sonia Sotomayor's service as a trial judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan), from 1992-98; and most prominently, an appeals judge on the U-S Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, from 1998. That New York City-based court handles appeals from New York, Connecticut, and Vermont.

Most federal appeals are heard by a three-judge panel that changes from case to case, from a larger pool of full-time judges, which in the 2nd Circuit numbers 12. A particular panel normally hears oral arguments, and has the option of issuing a full opinion. Sotomayor wrote opinions in many of the appeals listed below, but not all. In some bigger cases, the full circuit court will re-hear a case.

1. WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION – Ricci v. Stefano (2008)

• AT ISSUE: "Reverse" discrimination claim over a city's duty to carry out the results of employment tests even if they reduce job opportunities for minority workers. New Haven, CT officials used their discretion to decline certifying results of exams for promotions that would make disproportionately more whites eligible for promotions than minority applicants. City was concerned certifying them would lead to allegations of racial discrimination. Involves 20 firefighters led by white plaintiff Frank Ricci who sued after being denied promotion to lieutenant.
• HOW SHE RULED: Upheld rejection of the white firefighters' lawsuit, but the three-judge panel she was a part did not issue a full explanation of their decision, drawing criticism from other judges.
• QUOTE FROM ORAL ARGUMENT: "We're not suggesting that unqualified people be hired..." but "if your test is going to always put a certain group at the bottom of the pass rate so they're never, ever going to be promoted, and there is a fair test that could be devised that measures knowledge in a more substantive way, then why shouldn't the city have an opportunity to try to look and see if it can develop that?"
• IMPACT: Her ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court June 27, 2009.

2. ENVIRONMENT – Riverkeeper v. EPA (2007)

• AT ISSUE: Whether the Clean Water Act allows the EPA to use a cost-benefit analysis when approving the most environmentally friendly technology at cooling water intake structures. Her appeals court said companies must adopt the best technology available, a standard utility companies say would prove too costly.
• HOW SHE RULED: 2nd Circuit opinion was written by Sotomayor, who ruled for the environmental groups. Supreme Court reversed.
• QUOTE FROM HER RULING: "Congress has already specified the relationship between cost and benefits in requiring that the technology designated by the EPA be the best available."

3. FEDERAL LAWSUIT LIABILITY – Makeso v. Correctional Services Corp. (2000)

• AT ISSUE: Do lawsuits against the government extend to federal contractors. A federal prisoner sued a contractor running the facility because guards allegedly made him climb stairs, despite knowing he had a heart condition. He later had a heart attack when falling down stairs, also suffering other injuries. The man was in a halfway house for securities fraud.
• HOW SHE RULED: The appeals panel on which she sat ruled for the man. In her opinion, she concluded, under a 1971 Scotus precedent, companies performing government functions could be sued the same as federal employees. The high court reversed, saying only individual employees, not corporations, could be sued for any such violations.
• QUOTE FROM HER RULING: "Extending Bivens [previous high court precedent] liability to reach private corporations furthers [its] overriding purposes: providing redress for violations of constitutional rights."

4. DISABILITIES – Bartlett v. NY State Board of Law Examiners (1999)

• AT ISSUE: Workplace discrimination claim over whether a person with learning and reading disability deserved extra time to take her bar exams.
• HOW SHE RULED: Favored the woman and ordered the state to accommodate, saying test scores alone were not enough to determine a disability diagnosis. Supreme Court ordered the court to re-examine the issue, concluding that if someone is able to function like others with the help of glasses, medication, or otherwise compensating for their disabilities, they were not protected under the ADA. Upon reexamining the case, Sotomayor and her fellow judges again ruled for the woman.
• QUOTE FROM HER RULING: "By its very nature, diagnosing a learning disability requires clinical judgment."

5. STRIP SEARCHES – N.G. and S.G. v. Connecticut (2004)

• AT ISSUE: Did administrators have proper discretion to conduct a strip search on female students? Involves searches of girls at juvenile detention centers in Connecticut.
• HOW SHE RULED: She dissented from two male colleagues, who found some searches were legal, thereby shielding school officials from liability. The Supreme Court is currently deciding a similar case from Arizona involving a 13-year-old girl strip searched by officials looking for ibuprofen.
• QUOTES FROM HER DISSENT: Searches were "embarrassing and humiliating. The officials inspected the girls' naked bodies front and back, and had them lift their breasts and spread out folds of fat." Criticized the other judges who she said dismissed "the privacy interests of emotionally troubled children." "Our caselaw consistently has recognized the severely intrusive nature of strip searches and has placed strict limits on their use."

6. SECOND AMENDMENT – Maloney v. Cuomo (2009)

• AT ISSUE: Does a state ban on certain types of weapons violate the Second Amendment?
• HOW SHE RULED: She rejected a lawsuit from a man who wanted to possess a martial arts weapon called a nunchuka, made of two sticks joined by chain or rope. Sotomayor said the Second Amendment "right of the people to keep and bear arms" applied only to the federal government, and had not yet been applied to states.
• QUOTE FROM HER RULING: "The Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right."
• IMPACT: In a separate 2004 ruling (U.S. v. Sanchez Villar) that rejected a challenge to New York state's pistol licensing law, Sotomayor and her fellow judges concluded in a footnote, "the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right."

7. FREE SPEECH – Pappas v. Giuliani (2002)

• AT ISSUE: Was it proper to fire a government worker for engaging in allegedly racist acts on the job, but unrelated to his job? NYPD desk employee was sent packing for mailing back solicitations for charitable contributions with racist and bigoted materials.
• HOW SHE RULED: The appeals court concluded the city had the right to terminate the man without violating his free speech rights. But Sotomayor dissented, saying the employee's speech was anonymous, and that he was neither a policymaker nor worked a beat.
• QUOTE FROM HER DISSENT: While the speech was "patently offensive, hateful, and insulting," she cautioned the majority against "gloss[ing] over three decades of jurisprudence and the centrality of First Amendment freedoms in our lives just because it is confronted with speech is does not like." The NYPD's race relations concerns "are so removed from the effective functioning of the public employer that they cannot prevail over the free speech rights of the public employee."

Lucas A. Powe Jr.
Special to CNN

Monday, in the much anticipated New Haven, Connecticut, firefighters' case, the Supreme Court reversed an opinion joined by Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's Supreme Court nominee.

The reversal was expected and is not the first time an appointee has been reversed by the court he was about to join.

Indeed, two of Chief Justice Warren Burger's opinions for the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals were reversed in 1969, the year he joined the court. One was Watts v. United States, in which the defendant had been convicted for threatening the life of the president.

Keep reading...

Editor's Note: Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor broke her ankle Monday morning on her way to Washington for another round of meetings on Capitol Hill with senators weighing her nomination, according to the White House. Here, Senator Mary Landrieu signs the Supreme Court nominee's new cast.

Photo courtesy of Sen. Mary Landrieu's Office

Sen. Jeff Sessions, the judiciary panel's ranking Republican, meets with Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

Ruben Navarrette Jr.
Special to CNN

By nominating U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, President Obama made history. Meanwhile, conservatives - by invoking the name of Miguel Estrada - are coming close to rewriting it.

Trying to find a way to oppose Sotomayor without further enraging Latinos, those on the right are trying to change the subject by reaching back to 2002 and recalling what happened to Estrada, President Bush's nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

As conservatives point out, Democrats treated Estrada dreadfully. It was the first time in U.S. history that a minority in the Senate used a filibuster to kill an appeals court nomination. Eventually, Estrada asked Bush to withdraw his name. Today, he is still one of the best, most highly regarded lawyers in Washington.

And why did Democrats go after this nominee so aggressively? It's because - like Sotomayor - Estrada was a threat. The only difference is who feels threatened. Back then, it was Democrats. Now it's Republicans.

Keep reading...

President Obama last week introducing Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his choice for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Abigail Thernstrom
Special to CNN

Some of us thought the election of Barack Obama as president might signal a fading away of the old identity politics.

The assumption that fundamental lines of division in politics are set by race and ethnicity would seem to be a bit passé when 43 percent of white voters cast their ballots for a proudly "post-racial" African-American.

But the president himself has made identity politics front-page news with his selection of Judge Sonia Sotomayor as his Supreme Court nominee. She played an important role in the New Haven firefighters' case (Ricci v. DeStefano) now awaiting decision by the Supreme Court.

Sotomayor and two colleagues simply brushed aside the important constitutional and statutory questions raised by the city's decision to discard the results of a race-neutral test given to applicants for promotions within the department. Too many men of the "wrong" color had passed it - that is, all of those who scored highest were white except for one Hispanic.

Keep reading...

David Puente
AC360° Producer

Initially he called Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor a “reverse racist” and wanted her to withdraw from consideration. Newt Gingrich has apologized for his choice of words. Some, including President Obama himself, believe Judge Sotomayor would have also chosen some of her past words differently if she had the chance.

In the conservative magazine Human Events, Gingrich writes this week: "My initial reaction was strong and direct - perhaps too strong and too direct. ... Since then, some who want to have an open and honest consideration of Judge Sotomayor's fitness to serve on the nation's highest court have been critical of my word choice. ... The word 'racist' should not have been applied to Judge Sotomayor as a person, even if her words themselves are unacceptable."

According to Gloria Borger, senior political analyst for CNN, Gingrich's apology came because he was feeling the heat from his own party whose members are trying to avoid personal name calling.

Newt Gingrich and others called Sotomayor a racist after learning about her now infamous statement, "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."

I asked some Hispanic leaders to give their opinion on Sotomayor’s statement. Was it a racist statement?

Take a look at their reactions, and give us yours.

Raul Danny Vargas
National Chairman, Republican National Hispanic Assembly
Washington, DC

“Judge Sotomayor’s statements … are no doubt cause for scrutiny at the very least. I assume that she meant that one’s personal experiences have an impact on their perspectives of matters that come before the court, but I’m sure that if she had the opportunity she would want to go back and rephrase her comments…The “racist” term being thrown about in the media right now is probably over-reaching, but she will have to come up with responses that will satisfy those that have some real concerns with her ability to be truly objective. After all, the concept of blind justice, impartiality and the rule of law are fundamental to the role of the Supreme Court. While we have congratulated Judge Sotomayor on her nomination as the first Hispanic nominated to the Supreme Court, and applaud her personal and professional accomplishments, we have called for a fair and thorough scrutiny during the confirmation process.”

Angel Sepúlveda
VP Programming Terra USA
Los Angeles, CA

“Her track record speaks for itself. I don't believe President Obama looked at her as a woman or a Hispanic he simply chose the candidate with the best qualifications to perform a service to this country and looked at best interests of the American people. Judge Sotomayor stems from the hard working people, those that struggled like many Americans and know what it takes to make a difference, to dream and to achieve success. That is a story we can all relate to and it's an example to everyone regardless of race, sex, religious beliefs, etc. I really hope conservative activists and the Republican Party (senators and Congress) take all these facts into consideration before starting (which they already have) a debate as of whether or not she should be confirmed. She is truly the right person for the job! Regardless of the debates and the wildfire banter, the reality is that Judge Sotomayor has a clean record – a record confirmed twice by Republicans and Democrats alike.”

Arnoldo S. Torres
Policy Consultant
Sacramento, CA

“First of all the thought that any jurist is able to ignore their experiences and up-bringing when reviewing, deciding a legal matter is foolish. Up to now the Supreme Court and most of the federal bench has had a one constant type of experiences and up-bringing and others have mostly been non-existent. This is not to say that non-minority jurist are racists anymore than it is to say that Ms. Sotomayor's comments are racist. She is simply making a contrast between the backgrounds that have been in play and those that have not to date. It is impossible to argue that jurist, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, and life experiences do not use their backgrounds on the bench. It is impossible unless you have a reason to oppose someone who is not like those that you have come to expect to serve in this position. So Ms. Sotomayor's comments are not racist but they do honestly reflect a feeling and are an expression of how many minorities who have been excluded from institutions, trades and occupations see themselves.”

Follow David Puente on Twitter @puenteac360

Judge Sonia Sotomayor appears Tuesday on Capitol Hill with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, right.

Cynthia Gordy
Essence

Anita Hill will always be linked to the Senate confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court. In 1991, she gave an explosive testimony during the confirmation of Justice Clarence Thomas that forced a generation of women to stand up against sexual harassment. On the cusp of the Senate hearing for President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, Hill, today a professor of law at Brandeis University, talked to ESSENCE.com about Sotomayor, a former classmate of hers at Yale Law School, and the legacy of her Senate Judiciary testimony all these years later.

ESSENCE.COM: What do you think of Sonia Sotomayor as a Supreme Court nominee?
ANITA HILL: I think it's an excellent choice, just on the face of the selection. Here's a person who has years of experience on the bench, and has distinguished herself in private practice as well, and has been a prosecutor. I think she's got an incredible breadth of experience. Clearly she's an exceptional mind, having done very well at her undergraduate school, Princeton, and law school at Yale. But that's just the beginning. There are other things that I think make her a great choice.

Read more...