Blogs and Stories
Sonia Scores a KO
AP Photo
Not even the roughest—and most leading—questions from the GOP peanut gallery could derail Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Tuesday. As Scott Horton argues, she’s cruising toward confirmation.
As Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings opened on Monday, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham summed up Washington’s conventional wisdom with remarkable candor: “Unless you have a complete meltdown, you are going to be confirmed.” And in her two initial days of hearings, Sotomayor was unflappable. Her responses were measured, cautious, and limited, reflecting a strategy that was, just as Graham and others anticipated, designed to deflect expected attacks.
Sotomayor may not quite draw the 78 Senate votes that went to John Roberts, but if no bombshells emerge, she may not fall far short of that tally either.
In the contest flagged by many as the main event—the questioning by the new ranking member who has coordinated the Republican effort to derail her nomination, Alabama’s Jeff Sessions—Sotomayor scored a KO. Perhaps the soft-spoken Sessions knocked himself out. Criticizing her now oft-quoted “wise Latina” speech, which Sotomayor effectively walked back only minutes earlier in response to questioning from Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Sessions said he wished that Sotomayor were more like federal Judge Miriam Cedarbaum, who “believes that judges must transcend their personal sympathies and prejudices.” Sessions had apparently not scanned the audience very carefully, and Sotomayor quickly picked up on his slip. “My friend Judge Cedarbaum is here,” Sotomayor replied. “We are good friends, and I believe that we both approach judging in the same way, which is looking at the facts of each individual case and applying the law to those facts.” The moment was like that in Woody Allen’s Annie Hall, when a preening know-it-all cites media guru Marshall McLuhan and Allen pulls McLuhan out from behind a movie poster to disprove his point.
Instead of scoring on the issue that Sessions had picked for his lead, he allowed Sotomayor to debunk it. Cedarbaum, a well-regarded conservative appointed to the bench by President Reagan, quickly leaped to Sotomayor’s defense: “I don’t believe for a minute that there are any differences in our approach to judging, and her personal predilections have no effect on her approach to judging,” she told The Wall Street Journal’s Jess Bravin.
What caused Session to raise the comparison to Judge Cedarbaum? In 1986, both Sessions and Cedarbaum were nominated to the bench, but their nominations took starkly different trajectories. Cedarbaum was swiftly confirmed. The Sessions nomination, however, foundered in a Republican Senate as allegations mounted that he had referred to the NAACP as a “Communist” organization, that he said he felt positively about the Ku Klux Klan until he learned that “they smoked dope,” that he called a black prosecutor working for him “boy,” and said he needed to be “careful what he said to white folks.” While the Senate rejected Sessions, he was elected the state’s attorney general and then sent to the Senate to replace Democrat Howell Heflin in 1996—sweet revenge for Sessions, because Heflin had voted against his confirmation to the bench.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Sarah Drops the Act
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
Palin's Gold Mine
Duff McDonald is a contributing editor at New York magazine and a former contributing editor at Condé Nast Portfolio. His book, Last Man Standing, about Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, was published by Simon & Schuster in October.
Torture Prosecution Turnaround?
Scott Horton is a law professor and writer on legal and national security affairs for Harper's Magazine and The American Lawyer, among other publications.
Where Iran's Regime Learned Its Tricks
Scott Horton is a law professor and writer on legal and national security affairs for Harper's Magazine and The American Lawyer, among other publications.
The Real Story Behind the CIA's Torture Policy
Scott Horton is a law professor and writer on legal and national security affairs for Harper's Magazine and The American Lawyer, among other publications.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
As a federal trial/appellate private practitioner for more than three decades, I support Sotomayor appointment based on her holding that government employees, including judges, are not above the law (see, John Malesko v. Correctional Services Corporation, 229 F.3rd. 374 (2000), rev'd 534 U.S. 61 (2001)[Sotomayor affirmed right of individual to sue a private corporation working as an instrumentality of federal government for violations of constitutional rights]).
As an old long time Republican, I find that the "conservative Republican" Senators statements both surreal and hypocritical, based on my three decades of federal litigation. This experience confirms that the Rehnquist/Roberts Court has a policy of conspiring with government attorneys to deprive citizens rights under the Rule of Law and Constitution, i.e Justices Roberts, Stevens, Souter, Scalia, Thomas, et al., have held that they need not follow stare decisis; that both the Executive and Judicial Branch are absolutely immune from accountability for tortious and criminal acts, that the Bill of Rights is replaced by the Bill of Obligation; and that they can criminally affirm void orders issued in violation of federal statutory rights.
In this context because neither the Bush nor Obama White House, nor Congress, and nor the Virginia General Assembly have acted on my repeated petitions for an investigation of malfeasance of Federal and Virginia government attorneys, Beltway Lobbyist/Attorney Eric Holder, and judges, conspiracy obstructing my statutory right as a father and depriving me of my right to employment as a Virginia attorney (see, 2009 presentation to Northern VA Delegates, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAkEfjcA5sQ, and (http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml), I just filed a criminal complaint for treason and obstruction of justice, misprision of felony, and business conspiracy in violation of Va. Code ยงยง 18.2-481, 482, and 499, by by Republican candidate for Governor, former Att. Gen Bob McDonnell, Virginia government attorney and judges (http://home.earthlink.net/~treason/).
Query, if I as an experienced federal litigator cannot protect myself and Son from the malfeasance by government attorneys and judges denying access to an impartial jury trial and court--what is a young attorney or laymen parent to do to protect his and his children rights?
Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., Member in Good Standing of the Bar of the United States Supreme Court
This user is no longer registered.
As the monopoly on power enjoyed by Caucasian-Christian males over the last several centuries of Western Civilization continues to loosen, it's inevitable that many of them will not willingly give up "the good old days" when their rule was unquestioned and they could dole out crumbs to the "inferior" races and "weaker" sex as they wished.
To ease their sense of loss of entitlement and reduce the chance that they will react violently, it's therefore advisable for those in the forefront of the change to a more representative society be very "clean" (Biden's misspeak on Obama during the campaign actually spoke volumes), "nice", suitably respectful and unthreatening to the degree possible (of course their appearance alone makes them a threat). It seems analogous to the introduction of black players into Major League Baseball - one of the primary reasons Jackie Robinson was chosen to be first was because he was "clean" and could withstand the abuse from fans and some white players without losing his cool. And, he was an exceptional performer.
Whether or not Sodomayor is racist or a hothead are only convenient excuses for the GOP Caucasian-Christian males grilling her - if they couldn't hang those things on her they'd find something else, that's the way the game works. Her ultimate crime is that she symbolizes a future that scares them and their supporters, one in which they no longer dominate.
P.S. Just kidding.
why are you "just kidding" you just finished writing a very thoughtful piece re: the truth of this series of hearings from a historical perspective. I see no reason to put it down.
Think carefully, This is Just the Beginning of a new approach to power in the Western Civilization of this planet. Its time for people to wake up.
Sonia may score a KO, but the question is who will she knock out?
So let's see . . . today's Republican Party :
Screw empathy. Rich white males don't have time for your sob story, America. Get off your butts and get back to work. Work 4 part-time jobs without benefits, just quit your cryin' and complianin' and deal with it.
Women? Quit being so damn hysterical in the workplace. You might get a promotion if you just calm down and model OUR temperament. (See Exhibit A, Bill O'Reilly, for a model of moderate temperament. ) Don't like it? Vote for the Democratic Party then! Losers!
Latinos/Hispanics? You may be the fastest-growing demographic in America, but we're still going to employ half-century-old Ricky Ricardo stereotypes to mock you, even if you have a Yale law degree. Ha ha ha ! See you at the ballot box, insurgents!
Love it. Dry, droll and pithy. thanks, :-/
Wow! The "good old boys" turned quickly into a vicious pack of dogs. What are you guys afraid of, extinction? She's just a smart, well-educated woman that is not going to take any of your shit. No reason for alarm or stupid questions. http://newsy1.wordpress.com
Well, Newsy is half right. Ostensibly, she is well-educated. But if a Republican, on the witness stand had confused words "eminent" and "imminent"; (http://is.gd/1AeN1) and had trouble with "vagaries" and "vagrancies" ( http://is.gd/1As5w) well...we all know what Harriet Miers looked like. Double standard? For the s
So - before you denounce the "good old boys", let's take a look at the woman who has clearly received the benefits of affirmative action and will obviously vote to prolong those benefits for preferred races. Even though that fits in with the liberal mainstream, it doesn't fit in with the view of the rest of America. Looks like most of us are "good old boys" because we believe in merit over skin color and ethnicity.
"Merit over skin color"...really? What said you about Session's merit when he was nominated to the federal bench in 1986? Was he nominated for any reason other than his "good old boy" stature? What had he done to distinguish himself for that appointment? Easy answer...nothing, and thank goodness he was rejected because of his history of racially insensitive remarks and poor civil rights record. Thank goodness that even in 1986 there existed some senators who took offense to Sessions affection for the KKK, and affinity for calling black men "boys." That you ignore the irony in Sessions appointing himself Sottomayor's chief inquisitor speaks volumes about your view of "mainstream America." You sir are one of the "good old boys" and to pretend otherwise merely makes you a "bad old liar."
I was very impressed with how deliberate (and boring) judge Sotomayor was in the hearings. Every question posed to her was answered in an almost clinical leagalese that would give valium a run for it's money. What a snooze fest! And THAT is precisely the detatched and objective legal mindset we should have in a Supreme Court Justice.
The attempts by the right to get her to express her "personal" or "philosophical" views were invariably met with reference to legal precedent or simply, "I can't answer that in that way".
Well done, Sonja.
...and she didn't even have to smoke crack with Jeff Sessions to win him over.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.