RECENT POSTS
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
- White House State Dinner: The Menu, Entertainment, and Decor
- Dan Pfeiffer, White House Blogger
- Guests Begin to Arrive for White House State Dinner Festivities
- President Obama on Afghanistan Strategy: “It Is My Intention to Finish the Job”
- The Obamas Kick off their First State Visit, Welcome India's Prime Minister to the White House
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Will It Get Ugly? Both Sides Prepared for Start of Sotomayor Hearings Monday
July 12, 2009 11:37 AM
In a letter to the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee released by the White House this morning, Russell Laine, the chair of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, endorsed the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, saying she's "consistently demonstrated a firm understanding of, and a deep appreciation for, the challenges and complexities confronting our nation’s law enforcement officers."
The White House trumpeted the endorsement, saying that the IACP's backing means that "Judge Sotomayor now has the support of every major law enforcement organization in the U.S., representing nearly all of law enforcement."
But the White House knows that such endorsements can mean little in confirmation battles.
So officials are pulling out all the stops, trying to leave nothing to chance.
Sotomayor, White House officials say, paid 89 courtesy calls on members of the Senate, which they say is a new record.
A senior White House official tells ABC News that those meetings were immeasurably helpful in preparation for the hearings that start Monday because "you get a feel for what they want to know and how her answers work."
"We've spent most of the past two weeks in extensive mock hearings, so she gets a good feel for the questions and can hone her answers," the official said. "Her style is down to earth and straightforward -- not the sort of great speechmaker that [now-Supreme Court Chief Justice John] Roberts was, but a more pragmatic and 'just the facts' style that [former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day] O'Connor had when she was up."
Those mock hearings have been conducted by Vice President Biden's chief of staff, Ron Klain, White House Counsel Greg Craig, Counsel to the Vice President Cynthia Hogan, Associate White House Counsel Susan Davies and Deputy White House Counsel Cassandra Butts, among others.
The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., told reporters Friday that the hearing "will be focused on her views and writings. I will ask her if she agrees with the opinions of the organizations she supported."
Unquestionably, this will mean questions about her "wise Latina" remarks, as well as her leadership in the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.
It will also include her ruling against the white and Latino firefighters in the New Haven firefighters' case Ricci v DeStefano, since overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling.
The White House has dismissed criticisms against Sotomayor's ruling in that case, saying that "she applied 2nd Circuit precedent" and her ruling “shows restraint.”
But certainly not everyone agrees, and Ricci -- one of the white firefighters who alleged racial discrimination against the city of New Haven -- appears on the Republicans' witness list.
On Friday, the liberal group People for the American Way sent e-mails to journalists saying they needed to look into Ricci's "troubled and litigious work history," McClatchy Newspapers reported. Ricci filed a lawsuit in 1995 saying the city of New Haven discriminated against him regarding his dyslexia, the liberal group pointed out.
Over the weekend the NAACP, kicking off its 100th year anniversary convention, vowed a "full-court press" to make sure Sotomayor is confirmed, the New York Daily News reported.
"We fully support her," said NAACP President Benjamin Jealous. "An attack against one of us is an attack against all of us." Jealous said, "Sessions should cool his heels and focus on her qualifications."
Polls, in general, show strong public support for Sotomayor; a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll indicated 62 percent of the American people think she should be confirmed.
A recent CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey showed a tighter margin, with 47 percent support, 40 percent opposed and 13 percent unsure. CNN's poll director said one reason why the poll might show less support for Sotomayor is because CNN's survey, unlike other polls, does not identify Sotomayor as President Obama's pick.
The hearing kicks off tomorrow at 10 a.m. in the Hart Senate Office building.
Sotomayor will be introduced by home state Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, followed by the judge herself.
"Her foot is still in a boot/cast," the White House official said, adding that, physically, she's in quite a bit of discomfort.
Starting at 10 a.m. ET, ABCNews.com will feature live-streaming coverage of the Sotomayor confirmation on a special section at ABCNews.com/Politics/SoniaSotomayor.
- jpt
July 12, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (37)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
It won't get ugly. She's obviously less ideological than Roberts, and equally clearly more distinguished professionally than Alito (who wasn't really a slouch). This is not a Harriet Myers - there just is not any legitimate reason to block her. Republicans in office are mostly not idiots; they aren't going to send a gift wrapped "proof we're purely obstructionists!" package of soundbites to the Democrats for 2010.
Posted by: jhw539 | Jul 12, 2009 4:15:50 PM
yawn,
This will be an easy confirmation. Political suicide to the one who votes against her nomination.
So any who wants out the congress.... vote against her.
you will be toast!!!
Posted by: Omentum | Jul 12, 2009 3:03:45 PM
Although the Thomas hearings were a low point too, that I didn't want to see repeated.
I hope it doesn't get ugly.
Posted by: MayBee | Jul 12, 2009 2:45:57 PM
I really, really hope it doesn't get ugly.
The Alito hearings were a low point I'd like not to see repeated. Ever.
Posted by: MayBee | Jul 12, 2009 2:45:15 PM
Re: The CNN poll. The question was phrased is such a way (Would a senator be -justified- in opposing Sotomayer?)that a person who thinks she should be confirmed might still think Sessions was justified in not supporting her.
Posted by: joe west | Jul 12, 2009 2:43:56 PM
I hope it does not get ugly. Sotomayor would not be my choice for the highest court and I am not terribly impressed with her credentials. HOwever, that's how the system works. A liberal president was elected and he gets to chose liberal judges. It's the way the system balances things out. If she is not outrageously unqualified-- and she is not-- then she deserves to be approved.
But Tom, please do not pretend she is a conservative. She is not. And that's okay. I want a judicious mix of philosophies on the court, including conservatives, liberals, and moderates. And then I want those judges to be able to make their determinations without prejudice.
I do not want the Sotomayor hearings to become a circus and I hope mature Republican leaders like John McCain and Orrin Hatch are able to prevail and make sure that she gets a fair hearing and a vote in the full Senate based on her qualifications. Republicans need to turn the other cheek rather than exact pay-back for the way Obama and others responded to Sam Alito and John Roberts.
Posted by: moderate | Jul 12, 2009 2:41:34 PM
"why cant we simply appoint Justices based on the demographic makeup of the country? Use census data to tell the ethnic, racial, religious, sexual, and income information of the US population" - Ed
Is this a joke?
Posted by: paul | Jul 12, 2009 2:36:36 PM
Tom, It depends on how long down the pike the next nominee for the SC is. My guess is Paul Stevens will probably be replaced (die or retire) before Obama's first term is complete, and definitely before Obama's second term if he's reelected. Ginsberg will be nearly 80 by 2012 and she's got some health problems. My guess is Obama will try to be moderate after Sotomayor's appointment.
Posted by: LongT | Jul 12, 2009 2:35:37 PM
So I guess everything in Iran is completely resolved. Funny how that happened at the exact moment that the latest Michael Jackson circus began.
How much will we actually hear about these confirmation hearings this week? I know ABC already has several hours set aside to discuss the terribly important Michael Jackson situation, but how much time will something relevant have devoted to it?
Posted by: paul | Jul 12, 2009 2:33:01 PM
Sotomayor is a moderate to conservative judge who was appointed by Republican George H.W. Bush. She wrote three opinions favoring anti- abortion protesters, and anti-abortion policies. In 96 cases alleging racial discrimination, Sotomayor and the panel rejected the claim of racial discrimination roughly 78 times. Sotomayor also was tougher on convicted criminals than her colleagues during her six years as a federal district judge, sending more convicts to prison and handing out longer sentences than her colleagues. In the Ricci firefighter case, Sotomayor simply followed existing law; the Supreme Court in overturning that decision created new precedent (which is fine for the Supreme Court to do, but it is not the job of a lower court; Sotomayor rightly followed precedent in this case.) It's not clear what Republicans hope to gain with a fight here, since the next nominee is hardly likely to be more conservative.
Posted by: Tom | Jul 12, 2009 2:16:52 PM
I don't know why they are even bothering. It's a done deal! She'd have to grow horns, spit green vomit, and rotate her head 360 degrees before they would even possibly vote against her confirmation.
Posted by: LongT | Jul 12, 2009 1:48:15 PM
This Woman has no business judging anyone.....Wake up up America..
Posted by: sage | Jul 12, 2009 1:35:17 PM
Yes, Ron, his name was Harrold Carswell. But I think he was white.
But, bringing two discrimination law suits should not mean a person has a troubled and litigious work history. What does it mean if he wins every case he brings? There are some sore losers out there!
Exactly whom are the mock hearings mocking, anyway? Her or Congress? Maybe the people? Or maybe it's the People for the American Way. They are pretty much making a mockery of decency and fairness in this process.
Posted by: Bull | Jul 12, 2009 1:03:43 PM
why cant we simply appoint Justices based on the demographic makeup of the country? Use census data to tell the ethnic, racial, religious, sexual, and income information of the US population and make the courts reflect that information as closely as possible. Maybe with one Justice who is an illegal alien to reflect that population. This would avoid the costs and trouble of hearings and it would ensure the court reflect the public. This could also be used from Congress and the Senate or even the President, for example, the next President should be a hispanic women who, preferably, is homosexual. It makes sense to me.
Posted by: Ed | Jul 12, 2009 12:53:24 PM
i want to see her cry! I want her family upset! I want her hurting...then they can vote! :)))
Posted by: barry | Jul 12, 2009 12:30:58 PM
I'm half Irish half Latino and from what this woman has said, it sounds like she'd rather see the white race wiped off the face of the earth to be replaced solely by the latino race. Couple this with Obama's swooning defense of south American dictators and we can see institutionalized racism against whites.
Being half and half, I've received racism mostly because of the white in me - not the latino. Come on America, let's stop this nonsense!
Posted by: Mono-Race Soto-Mayer | Jul 12, 2009 12:15:32 PM
HAS THERE EVER been a more blatently racist nominee to the Supreme Court ? This is the sort of thing you get when the primary consideration for any post is the person's skin color.
Posted by: Ron | Jul 12, 2009 12:05:17 PM
Post a comment


