It’s On: Sotomayor Hearings Interrupted By Pro-Life Protester, Graham Predicts Confirmation – Updated With Full Transcript Of Sotomayor’s Opening Remarks

Jul 13, 2009 12 Comments ›› Erik Wong

Watching the hearings live on Fox. It is sickeningly PC. Hearings to continue tomorrow. Developing…

Video: Dem Casts Chief Justice Roberts As Activist Judge During Sotomayor Hearings

WASHINGTON – Senate Democrats praised Sonia Sotomayor as a judicial pioneer, but Republicans questioned her impartiality and President Barack Obama’s views as well Monday at confirmation hearings for the nation’s first Hispanic nominee to the Supreme Court.

Even so, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Sotomayor, “Unless you have a complete meltdown, you’re going to get confirmed.”

“And I don’t think you will” have a meltdown, he added quickly.

Graham spoke after Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, praised Sotomayor in remarks that opened confirmation proceedings in a packed Senate hearing room. “She’s been a judge for all Americans. She’ll be a justice for all Americans,” he said.

Leahy likened Sotomayor to other judicial pioneers, citing Thurgood Marshall, the first black justice on the high court, as well as Louis Brandeis, the first Jew, and Sandra Day O’Connor, the first woman.

“Let no one demean this extraordinary woman,” Leahy said in a warning to committee Republicans to tread lightly in the days ahead.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the senior Republican, vowed a “respectful tone” and “maybe some disagreements” when lawmakers begin questioning Sotomayor on Tuesday.

Moments later, he underscored that point. “I will not vote for, and no senator should vote for an individual nominated by any president who believes it is acceptable for a judge to allow their own personal background, gender, prejudices or sympathies to sway their decision,” he said.

“Call it empathy, call it prejudice or call it sympathy, but whatever it is, it’s not law,” Sessions said. “In truth, it’s more akin to politics, and politics has no place in the courtroom.”

That was a reference to Obama’s declaration—made before he named Sotomayor—that he wanted a person of empathy on the high court.

Obama named Sotomayor, 55 and a child of the South Bronx, to replace retiring Justice David Souter.

While Souter was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, a Republican, he became a reliable member of the court’s liberal faction.

If confirmed, Sotomayor is not expected to alter the court’s balance on controversial issues such as abortion and affirmative action.

Video: “Abortion is Murder!”

Sotomayor, who has served 17 years as a federal judge, including 11 on the appeals court, listened silently from her seat at the witness table a few feet away as the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee made introductory remarks.

Her turn to speak came next, to be followed by two or three days of questioning from the panel that will cast the first votes on her appointment.

Leahy and Sessions escorted Sotomayor to her seat before the hearing began into the first Supreme Court nominee by a Democratic president in 15 years.

Outside, a small group of anti-abortion protesters opposed to her confirmation unfurled a banner that said, “Senators: Stop the Slaughter! Filibuster Sotomayor.” It was unclear whether Sotomayor saw them.

Less than an hour into the hearing, one anti-abortion protester began shouting inside the room, and was quickly hustled away.

In the Senate as a whole, there was no talk of a filibuster, under which Republicans would attempt to block a vote on her nomination. Instead, barring a gaffe of major proportions, Sotomayor seemed on her way to confirmation even before Leahy rapped the opening gavel.

In the nearly seven weeks since Sotomayor’s nomination, critics have labored without much success to exploit weaknesses in her record.

Even as they try, Republican senators also must take care to avoid offending Hispanic voters, the fastest-growing segment of the electorate by attacking Sotomayor too harshly.

Still, Republicans signaled that they will press her to explain past rulings involving discrimination complaints and gun rights, as well as remarks that they say raise doubts about her ability to judge cases fairly.

The most fertile ground for Republican questioning appears to be on race and ethnicity, focused on Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” comment and a ruling on white firefighters from New Haven, Conn., who won their Supreme Court case last month.

In a speech in 2001, Sotomayor said she hoped a “wise Latina” often would reach better conclusions than a white male who lacked the same life experience.

By a 5-4 vote last month, the high court agreed with the firefighters, who claimed they were denied promotions on account of their race after New Haven officials threw out test results because too few minorities did well. The court reversed a decision by a New York appeals court panel that included Sotomayor.

(AP)

—————————–
Courtesy of the White House:

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank Senators Schumer and Gillibrand for that kind introduction.

In recent weeks, I have had the privilege and pleasure of meeting eighty-nine gracious Senators, including all the members of this Committee. I thank you for the time you have spent with me. Our meetings have given me an illuminating tour of the fifty states and invaluable insights into the American people.

There are countless family members, friends, mentors, colleagues, and clerks who have done so much over the years to make this day possible. I am deeply appreciative for their love and support. I want to make one special note of thanks to my mom. I am here today because of her aspirations and sacrifices for both my brother Juan and me. Mom, I love that we are sharing this together. I am very grateful to the President and humbled to be here today as a nominee to the United States Supreme Court.

The progression of my life has been uniquely American. My parents left Puerto Rico during World War II. I grew up in modest circumstances in a Bronx housing project. My father, a factory worker with a third grade education, passed away when I was nine years old.

On her own, my mother raised my brother and me. She taught us that the key to success in America is a good education. And she set the example, studying alongside my brother and me at our kitchen table so that she could become a registered nurse. We worked hard. I poured myself into my studies at Cardinal Spellman High School, earning scholarships to Princeton University and then Yale Law School, while my brother went to medical school. Our achievements are due to the values that we learned as children, and they have continued to guide my life’s endeavors. I try to pass on this legacy by serving as a mentor and friend to my many godchildren and students of all backgrounds.

Over the past three decades, I have seen our judicial system from a number of different perspectives – as a big-city prosecutor, a corporate litigator, a trial judge and an appellate judge. My first job after law school was as an assistant District Attorney in New York. There, I saw children exploited and abused. I felt the suffering of victims’ families torn apart by a loved one’s needless death. And I learned the tough job law enforcement has protecting the public safety. In my next legal job, I focused on commercial, instead of criminal, matters. I litigated issues on behalf of national and international businesses and advised them on matters ranging from contracts to trademarks.

My career as an advocate ended—and my career as a judge began—when I was appointed by President George H.W. Bush to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. As a trial judge, I decided over four hundred and fifty cases, and presided over dozens of trials, with perhaps my best known case involving the Major League Baseball strike in 1995.

After six extraordinary years on the district court, I was appointed by President William Jefferson Clinton to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On that Court, I have enjoyed the benefit of sharing ideas and perspectives with wonderful colleagues as we have worked together to resolve the issues before us. I have now served as an appellate judge for over a decade, deciding a wide range of Constitutional, statutory, and other legal questions.

Throughout my seventeen years on the bench, I have witnessed the human consequences of my decisions. Those decisions have been made not to serve the interests of any one litigant, but always to serve the larger interest of impartial justice.

In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law. The task of a judge is not to make the law – it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress’s intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court. In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand.

The process of judging is enhanced when the arguments and concerns of the parties to the litigation are understood and acknowledged. That is why I generally structure my opinions by setting out what the law requires and then by explaining why a contrary position, sympathetic or not, is accepted or rejected. That is how I seek to strengthen both the rule of law and faith in the impartiality of our justice system. My personal and professional experiences help me listen and understand, with the law always commanding the result in every case.

Since President Obama announced my nomination in May, I have received letters from people all over this country. Many tell a unique story of hope in spite of struggles. Each letter has deeply touched me. Each reflects a belief in the dream that led my parents to come to New York all those years ago. It is our Constitution that makes that Dream possible, and I now seek the honor of upholding the Constitution as a Justice on the Supreme Court.

I look forward in the next few days to answering your questions, to having the American people learn more about me, and to being part of a process that reflects the greatness of our Constitution and of our nation. Thank you.