• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Morning Bell: A Victory for the Rule of Law

    In his opening statement Monday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor: “I don’t think anybody here worked harder for Senator McCain than I did, but we lost, and President Obama won. And that ought to matter. It does to me…Unless you have a complete meltdown, you’re going to get confirmed.” One day of opening statements, and two days of questioning later, it does not appear that Sotomayor had the “complete meltdown” necessary to derail her nomination. But that does not mean her confirmation hearings were a waste of time.

    Quite the contrary. Tough questioning by conservative senators afforded Sotomayor a rare opportunity to defend the principles of progressive/liberal jurisprudence. But Sotomayor declined to defend those principles at every turn. Instead, according to Case Western law professor Jonathan Adler, Sotomayor sounded “more like the sort of nominee we would have expected from a President McCain than a President Obama.”

    Rejecting the Living Constitution: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked Sotomayor flat out: “Do you believe the Constitution is a living, breathing, evolving document?” Sotomayor then flatly rejected the views of liberal scholars and jurists: “The Constitution is a document that is immutable to the sense that it’s lasted 200 years. The Constitution has not changed except by amendment. It is a process, an amendment process that is set forth in the document. It doesn’t live other than to be timeless by the expression of what it says.” She later told Sen. Al Franken (D-MN): “[T]he role of the court is never to make the policy. It’s to wait until Congress acts.”

    Rejecting Transnationalist Jurisprudence: Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) asked Sotomayor: “You’ve been fairly critical of Justice Scalia’s criticism of the use of foreign law in making decisions. And I would like for you to cite for me, either in the Constitution or in the oath that you took, outside of the treaties, the authority that you can have to utilize foreign law in deciding cases in the courts of law in this country.” Sotomayor then flatly rejected the views of established transnationalist jurisprudence leaders like Harold Koh: “I have actually agreed with Justice Scalia and Thomas on the point that one has to be very cautious even in using foreign law with respect to the things American law permits you to. And that’s in treaty interpretation or in conflicts of law because it’s a different system of law.”

    Rejecting Obama’s Empathy Standard: Sotomayor even flatly rejected President Obama’s own criteria for selecting Supreme Court nominees, telling Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ): “I wouldn’t approach the issue of judging in the way the president does. He has to explain what he meant by judging. I can only explain what I think judges should do, which is judges can’t rely on what’s in their heart. They don’t determine the law. Congress makes the laws.”

    Was Sotomayor being honest with the Senate Judiciary Committee with these answers? We don’t know. That is a decision each Senator will have to make on their own. At bare minimum though, Sotomayor’s testimony proves that the left is unwilling to defend the core of their judicial beliefs in a public forum. As the New York Times reports: “By forcing Judge Sotomayor to retreat from Mr. Obama’s desire for justices with “empathy,” Republicans have effectively set a new standard that future nominees will be pressed to meet…Several legal experts said Judge Sotomayor’s testimony might make it harder for Mr. Obama to name a more liberal justice next time.”

    Quick Hits:

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    47 Responses to Morning Bell: A Victory for the Rule of Law

    1. Michael - New York N says:

      These reckless tax and spend policies coming from this liberal out of touch administration and the democrats will leave this country weakended for the next 10 years. As for this Judical Nonimee, well, what truth has the Obama liberals told the American public lately as they keep moving the goal post each time a policy or promise fails.

    2. Ken Jarvis - Las Veg says:

      "A hospital that serves thousands of indigent Massachusetts residents sued the state on Wednesday, charging that its costly universal health care law is forcing the hospital to cover too much of the expense of caring for the poor."

      THE GOP DOES GIVE A SPIT ABOUT THE POOR.

    3. Recruiter, CT says:

      I think it was a dumb comment from Senator Graham to tell Sotomayor that unless she has a complete meltdown she was going to get confirmed. Why bother having the hearings? Seems like a huge waste of time and money when the outcome is virtually assured. We are living in an extremely scary time when Obama and his band of thugs and thieves want to control every aspect of out lives. It may be time to sell the business, pack up and move somewhere and live off what we have saved before the Government takes it all away.

    4. Joe Ruffino, New Yor says:

      Only time will tell. This nominee will be passed. Was she being honest or just saying one thing and doing another like this President.

    5. Arizonaindian, Mesa, says:

      Next come the SS or the Storm Troopers? This has become beyond Insane !

    6. Nelia, AZ says:

      Governing by threat, bribe, pay-off continues to be the method of operation by the Chicago Mob politics of this administration. Rahm Emanuel's directive to 4 cabinet secretaries to withhold stimulus funds to Arizona because Senator Kyl dared to criticize Obama's 787 stimulus package is further proof.

    7. LogicalSinger says:

      "President Obama won. And that ought to matter"

      It matters within the powers reserved to the President. That doesn't mean other branches of government should just roll over and let him have his way. If you don't want Sotomayor, fight back, for heaven's sake, instead of giving us these mealy-mouthed platitudes.

    8. Richard Cancemi, Arl says:

      Sotomayor's answers to uphold, abide by, and judge according to the Constitution and not personal ideology, is encouraging.

      But when has a Liberal/Socialist ever been truthful?

    9. Pat Lafayette, LA says:

      How nice. The jackboots now wear ballet slippers. The Steffi/Rahm cabal remind me of Josef Goebbels. Goebbels was a piker compared to these guys.

    10. Patricia,Hobbs,N.M. says:

      I don't think it will make it harder for Whoabama to nominate another judge to the supreme court a all. I think they did exactly as planned. Sotomayor played her part perfectly and will most likely be the next supreme court justice. She gave a stellar preformance denouncing everything that Obama beleives in,and everything she ever said. She was just very misunderstood and we took her words out of context(choke-choke). We will all find out what she's made of once she takes her seat and I don't think anyone is going to like it much.

    11. Matt. Pacifico, Mary says:

      To whomever it may concern. I for one am sick and tired of hearing – well you know he won. That doesn't give the Democratic Party or for that matter the President or Pelosi or Reed card blanc and treat the rest of the country like we are in a dictatorship. Just look at what they have done and how their words are spoken. Most of the time down at the rest of the country.

      I for one am still waiting for the Transparency and Bi Partisonship. And oh – where is Bidden, I thought he was going to watch dog the Stimulus Money. What a joke.

    12. Christopher Popham S says:

      Just thinking–if Emmanuel is a special assistant

      to the President, then why is he behaving instead

      like a henchman, bossing around Secretaries of the

      Cabinet? Who does he think he is? The President?

    13. Winghunter says:

      I saw little more than weak pandering wherein she knows once confirmed she can and will do whatever she wants to do.

      The most important question, not just to me but, also to many of our Founding Fathers, she refused to even answer…our inalienable right to defend ourselves.

      Sotomayor will make Ginsburg look like a Centrist!

    14. Christopher Popham S says:

      Good OLD Harry Reid is at it again, supplanting

      a war effort bill with a personal (hate crimes?)

      addition?

      Mr. Reid has accumulated an $11 million

      campaign war chest for re-election in 2010.

      Are the people of Nevada so enamored of this man

      that they will actually consider allowing

      him to stay in office? Wherever there is anyone

      opposing an incumbent or oligarch in Congress,

      we support you and wish you well in 2010.

      If we as voters do not shake up and 'change' the

      face of Congress soon, then the sorry fate of

      this once great nation does indeed hang in the balance.

    15. copyeditor, DC says:

      There is a simple error in your "quick hits." Senator Kyl is from Arizona.

    16. Jonathan Seid, Willi says:

      I don't buy what the Latina Lady was selling the Senate. It is a political tactic to present one's self as a moderating voice, conservative in approach, yet when the voting is counted, making sure one's vote remains on the left side of the political spectrum. Putting a pink ribbon on a pig in a poke is simply a pig with a

      pink ribbon. Nothing has changed except the calendar date.

    17. Ken Fitts says:

      Unfortunately this lady is a train we cannot stop, as Mr. Graham said. she has repudiated her often stated previous statements in blatent lies to the committee, but she'll be confirmed.

      Were she a Republican, or worse a conservative, the Democrat attack machine would have destroyed her as it did with Judge Bork and many others.

      Where is the Republican leadership standing up for our constitution and truth? Is it Mr. Graham who is so willing to capitulate? Is there no one in the Republican ranks besides Sarah Palin with the strength of character to stand up decry what is happening under the Obama, Pelosi, Reed regime? It's time the professional politicians grew a set.

    18. Dennis A. Social Cir says:

      This will be just like obama, he talked out of both sides of his mouth. Once she is appointed she will do what she does best, side with the liberals and obama on all issues.

    19. Bob Veigel, Arlingto says:

      Sotomayor is a liar and a racist. Why will the Supreme Court be better if she becomes a Justice?

      What is the matter with Republicans? No guts. Image over substance and political correctness trumps truth and facts.

      Anyone in favor of any Obama program or nominee is either stupid and without question is un-American.

    20. Andrew Schlessinger says:

      You said "By forcing Judge Sotomayor to retreat from Mr. Obama’s desire for justices with “empathy,” Republicans have effectively set a new standard that future nominees will be pressed to meet."

      The only way this standard is enforced is if her nomination is rejected by the Senate. Otherwise it shows to America that all you have to do is tell them what they want to hear, then do what you really want when you get the job. This has become standard operating procedure with the Obama administration.

    21. Ken, Santa Barbara says:

      I wish more people actually read your full article and appreciated how close you got to getting it not only geographically and with total accuracy in the body but politically. This candidate can be a victory for the rule of law. It appears we are all capable of mistakes, understanding, and correcting ourselves.

      As for comments referencing SS, storm troopers, pigs, and Goebbels, they provide little hope for conciliation and peace amongst ourselves.

      I find those comments and anyone in favor of any Obama program or nominee as either stupid or un-American to be pitifully hateful and without credible basis.

    22. Harry, Illinois says:

      Until we have a WORLD ORDER, we should not be invoking foreign law into our system. It will only complicate and possibly due to radical interpretation over ride or usurp our laws. We have enough problems as it is already within our Judicial system. We don't need to add anymore.

      Also; Wait until Judge Ginsburg steps down, that will really set a lifetime agenda for the far left.

    23. Lee-White Tanks AZ says:

      I'm beginning to find common cause with Rush (I usually do). Unless Judge Sotomayor is lying through her teeth her answers are far more reassuring than I was expecting. Now if I could hear from her a Pro-Life answer regarding any aspect of the Abortion issue, I would have to support her confirmation.

      PC is Thought Control

      LEE

    24. Lee-White Tanks AZ says:

      BTW: Hurray for Senator Kyl. It's just to bad that he has to share his positions with "Mr Congeniality" McBipartisonship. Arizona deserves better than McCain. For those outside AZ McCain is critical of Kyl and the legislature for turning down or questioning the use of Stimulus funds.

      PC is Thought Control

      LEE

    25. Dave, Tennessee says:

      I cannot believe that you are buying Sotomayer's responses to the questions and believe that she is who her statements before the committee says she is, not her statements made in the past not in jucicial settings and her affiliations now and in the past.

      Apparently you never have read enough of Marx and Lenin that any lie, action, process, statement is okay as long as it achivies the advancement of communism.

    26. Lynn B. DeSpain says:

      Ain't God funny!

      Hozro

    27. Marvin Sparks, NV says:

      If it walks like a skunk, talks like a skunk and looks like a skunk, i'ts probably a skunk. Drownding it in lavender water won't change that.

    28. Wallyblu, Zion, IL says:

      She is testifying under oath. If it can be proved that she lied later can she be prosecuted for purjury.

    29. Roger S., MA. says:

      Define "Victory"

      Define "Rule of Law"

      Define "Meltdown"

      Define "Complete"

      Describe what we saw and heard the last 3 days.

      Now tell me how much worse it needed to get to

      match your dfinitions.

      20 Years of record one way = 20 hours of testimony the opposite way? Testimony often stammering, incoherent, evasive, plainly ludicrous? And that's OK?

    30. Richard Cancemi, Arl says:

      Can anyone tell me why we sent hundreds of thousands of troops in the past to Southeast Asia to die and be maimed fighting Communism when we let Obama and his clique install it in the USA?

      Where is the hard and true opposition? Are people that blind?, that stupid?, that ignorant?, that complacent?

      Make no mistake Obama is a Marxist and is patterning his administration in the Russian politburo style right under our noses with his Czars!

      Does anyone see the irony in this?

      Those poor GI's who died and are maimed must feel betrayed!

      America should hang its head in shame!

    31. Mary Lou Bruner, Min says:

      Judge Sotomayor should not be confirmed just because she was nominated by the President who won the election. The President has the power to nominate, but the Senate has the power to confirm the nomination. This is part of the "Check and Balance" system. President Obama stated he nominated this judge because he thought she would be empathetic. Perhaps he was also looking for a particular race and gender.

      The hearings revealed a preponderance of evidence that this judge has had an activist agenda for many years. In her speeches her agenda was very clear. President Obama must have been aware of her many speeches when he nominated her.

      Though she did not make any huge mistakes during the hearings she could not explain statements she made over and over in speeches. She also took the Fifth Amendment on gun control and abortion. She refused to answer questions on these issues.

      The question the Senators must answer by their vote up or down is whether they believe what she said in the hearings this week or what she has said for the last decade in her speeches.

    32. Ken - Santa Barbara says:

      Just so there is a source for those who may or may not know what they are talking about this can help you with your definitions.

      http://dictionary.reference.com/

      You wiull find collaboration here as well

      As for another interesting read for those who are willing to try to understand

      TheNextRight.com buzz Pipe

      ——————————————————————————–

      Bipartisanship?

      Posted: 15 Jul 2009 03:08 PM PDT

      Should Republicans seek more bipartisanship? The answer is an unequivocal "Sometimes."

      People mean different things by bipartisan. Most politicians mean "shut up and do what we want", and "bipartisanship" mostly becomes a rhetorical club to swing at opponents. Practically speaking, I think there are a couple ways to approach bipartisanship.

      Compromise [Unlikely]: Republicans and Democrats are not likely to pursue bipartisan compromise on the more significant, contentious issues. As Atrios has so often reminded us, People Disagree About Stuff. Compromising over those disputes is almost invariably a bad idea. It's bad politics (because you're angering your supporters) and bad policy (because you're splitting the policy baby).

      What's more, I don't think we really want that kind of bipartisanship. It invariably involves horse-trading (you can buy my vote if I can buy your vote). Outside of government, we call that sort of thing collusion and those of us being colluded against get stuck with much higher prices (government spending & taxes). Russell Roberts' terrific 1995 essay ("If you're paying, I'll have top sirloin") touched on this point.

      Collaboration [Yes, hopefully]: The second kind of bipartisanship – working together on areas of mutual agreement – is much more possible, and Republicans really ought to pursue it. We don't do enough collaborative, bi-partisan policy-making, because politicians tend to focus on the more contentious issues. For instance, everybody basically agrees on things like transparency, but that means there are relatively few points to be scored. Everybody wants to Win The War, nobody wants to fix the sink. As a result, important things don't get done. Republicans can begin rebuilding their credibility by pursuing some of this low-hanging fruit.

      It takes two to agree, and to fight….which would be the better road to travel?

    33. Lee-White Tanks AZ says:

      Wlleyblu:

      How soon we forget, Lying under oath has no consequenses when applied to our"Political Class", just ask exPOTUS William Jefferson Clinton.

      PC is Thought Control

      LEE

    34. Pingback: A Victory for the Rule of Law « Conservative Thoughts and Profundity

    35. marcia illinois says:

      Obama, through Sotomayor,is accomplishing another major step in the destruction of our country. This is another assault on our Freedoms engineered by Obama and his army of evil bred in the state of Il.,including Chicago, E.St.Louis(little Chicago),Belleville and many smaller towns corrupted completely by those in Office,from mayors and boards on up.Shout Now and Shout Loud against them!It starts at the bottom folks, so vote wisely and throw the "bums" out!

    36. Thomas Akin, Huntsvi says:

      Hello:

      I believe Judge Sonia Sotomayor said what the senators wanted to here.It is a mistake to decide on her present statements.Instead the senators should decide upon the 'past' in court statements of Judge Sonia Sotomayor. This is how you determine the future ruling this judge will render.

      Judge Sonia Sotomayor will continue as she has in the past if she get into the supreme court.

      The senators should remember that the supreme court justices feels she will not make a good supreme court judge.It will be a serious mistake to confirm this judge to the supreme court.

      My respects to the forum.

    37. marcia illinois says:

      Obama,through Sotomayor,is accomplishing another major step in the destruction of our country. Thisis another assault on our Freedoms engineered by Obama and his army nofd evil,bred in the state if Il, including Chicago,E.St Louis(little Chicago),Belleville and many smaller towns corrupted completewly by those in Office,from Mayors & Boards on up. Shout Now & Shout Loud against them! It starts at the bottom folks,so vote wisely & throw the "BUMS" out!

    38. whicket williams Kin says:

      That team that coached her intensely for weeks did a good job. she said the right things at the right time. This should scare everybody to death, because it proves what she thinks about honesty, and telling lies.

    39. Mark Wright, Wolfe C says:

      She lied to the Senators and to us during her testemony. She WILL be and activist socialist justice … It is in her democrat nature to lie when she needs to. Of course the left can not defend their judicial ideas because they are counter- constitutional.

      It was a small victory to see her lie … it will be a great defeat when she is placed on the supreme court and proves to be the most liberal european socialist ever to sit the court.

      President Obama doesn't care about the U.S. Constitution or the people of the United States. If he cared, he would not be ramming through these nation killing last two bills.

    40. Wayne Ker says:

      She sure sounds like an Obama appointee to me, in flip-flopping/campaign mode at every turn.

    41. J. White, south Jers says:

      So, Sotomayor- what you said is that you are an obscenity liar? Perhaps, you should be brought up on perjury charges????

      That you are "telling" what the Empty Suit in the White House is telling you to say?

      What a disgusting spectacle of a reasonable process turned into political verbal fertilizer.

    42. PapaLou, lower Alaba says:

      If the premise of the arguement is freedom and liberty, then there can be no compromise or so called bi-partisan solution. The statis position is they will alway take less to move there agenda forward and the conservative will always lose. Freedom and liberty is at stake here, we should consider our Founding Fathers principals of limited government and the exercise of prudence in deciding matters of public policy. At the core of this is the notion that equality is justice for all, but in reality, equality is oportunity as outcome for the individual has many varibles and simply can't be equal for everyone.

      Sotomayor is but another "testing of the waters" to see how far they can subvert our liberty and personal freedoms.

    43. Benjamin Marcoux says:

      Having been around some 76 years as a devout American Citizen and Christian,one certainly does not have to wonder why we have only managed to pile up such a huge political stack of PURE GARBAGE LABELED–OUR DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLIC GOVERNMENT—.Our senators are now labeled–"sin-a-tors"–our pRESIDENT —UG,"speaks with forked- tonque",is now labeled "liar" and found to be factually labeled as such through out his self-proclaimed Nat. Health Care Bill HB 3200. The America Citizen has finally awakened to all of this sorted hypocrisy and I dare say ,all hell is going to bust loose come 2010 and 2012 !!! old and tired of it all. 09 17-09

    44. Pingback: What Is The Legal Left So Afraid Of? | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

    45. Pingback: Morning Bell: Former Attorney General Ed Meese on Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

    46. Pingback: And The Nomination for SCOTUS Goes Too… Elena Kagan | NetRight Daily

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×