Again, we present a quick wrap up of the day’s events. Perhaps the most significant nomination-related news didn’t come from the hearings but from the pages of the Washington Times. In an op-ed this morning, Wayne LaPierre of the NRA let loose on Judge Sotomayor’s anti-gun bias. She and colleagues on the Second Circuit ruled against Second Amendment rights in two cases, one of which, Maloney, is now being appealed to the Supreme Court, where Sotomayor may soon sit. Or not—LaPierre says those decisions “raise serious questions about her fitness …
Yes, it’s early in the day, but this one is a winner. Sotomayor, responding to Senator Coburn, on the use of foreign law: “There’s a public misunderstanding of the word ‘use.’” Positively Clintonian. Update: Another candidate for Quote of the Day: Sotomayor, responding to Senator Coburn’s question as to whether Americans have a right to self-defense: “That’s an abstract question with no particular meaning to me.”
In response to questioning by Senator Cornyn, Judge Sotomayor explained that, “When parties are dissatisfied, they file for rehearing en banc“–that is, a new hearing before all the judges on the Circuit. She continued: “That’s what happened in Ricci,” the case challenging New Haven’s discrimination against white and Hispanic firefighters. Except it didn’t. Karen Lee Torre, counsel for the New Haven firefighters, decided to appeal the case straight to the Supreme Court, because the odds of persuading the entire Circuit to rehear a summary order are essentially zero–a summary order …
This post contains some quick takes and many quotations from the first real day of the hearings. Let’s begin with the bottom line: Judge Sonia Sotomayor did not impress, but it probably does not matter. Her goal today was to avoid slipping and saying something that could get her into trouble. On that count, mission accomplished. More remarkable, though, was the use of conservative language and ideas by both sides of the Committee and by the nominee herself. Today, a nominee for the High Court must at least pay lip …
Judge Sonia Sotomayor announced today her admiration for Justice Benjamin Cardozo, who served for 6 years on the Supreme Court after nearly 30 on the New York Court of Appeals. Let’s hope she misspoke, as she has admitted to doing frequently in her speeches and written remarks. Cardozo, she said, believes that “the facts drive the law and the conclusion that the law will apply to that case,” and had “great respect” for precedent, the legislative branch, and the Constitution. Unfortunately for Cardozo, the facts and the law were often …
So said Judge Sotomaytor in response to a question by Sen. Kohl on racial discrimination and diversity. But what about Chief Justice Roberts’s elegant statement to the contrary on racial relations and equality? “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” What kind of “effort” matters, too. Does she mean still more state-sanctioned or -required discrimination? That’s a question to which the Senate must demand a response.
“Life experiences could make a difference,” said Judge Sotomayor in response to a question by Sen. Session. But, she says, “not the result.” So do they or don’t they? Sen. Sessions noted her comment that “[m]y experience affects the facts I see.” Does the Judge, he asked, stand by that statement today? “No, I do not stand by the understanding of that statement.” In other words, its meaning? So does she disclaim it or not? It would be an easy thing to do.
Sen. Leahy asked Judge Sotomayor about several of her controversial statements, including this one: Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases…. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better …
The chief complaint with Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s handling of Ricci, the New Haven firefighters case, is not that her court reached the wrong result but that it shirked its duty to give the case its full consideration, in an obvious attempt to bury it. That effort, of course, did not work, and the Supreme Court released an elegant decision in the case by Justice Kennedy, who hints at the strangeness of Sotomayor’s handling of the case. His description: After full briefing and argument by the parties, the Court of Appeals …
Sometimes judicial activism isn’t about who wins the case. It may be that the Supreme Court got it right today when it ruled that school officials violated the constitutional rights of 13-year-old Savana Redding when they ordered her to shake out her underwear to see if she was hiding more of the prescription pain pills found on a schoolmate. But one thing it didn’t do is provide any kind of guidance for school officials who now face the prospect of liability for violating this new rule… whatever it is. This …
