Senate Panel Votes 13-6 in Favor of Sotomayor
The Senate Judiciary Committee today voted 13-6 to send the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the full Senate. The vote sets the stage for Judge Sotomayor to be confirmed before the Senate's August recess.
The following is an edited collection of statements from a variety of organizations which represent the full spectrum of views on the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.
People For the American Way Executive Vice President Marge Baker issued the following statement:
"Today's vote moves this historic nominee one step closer to the Supreme Court. During her hearing, Judge Sotomayor demonstrated over and over again her intelligence, her open-mindedness, and her deep respect for the Constitution and the rule of law. I'm glad that already a significant number of Republicans have spoken out in favor of Judge Sotomayor and that she received bipartisan support today. It's unfortunate that not everyone has been able to put aside political concerns, but that does nothing to undermine the importance of confirming the first Hispanic and third woman to our nation's highest Court.
"We are proud to have been able to support the nomination of such an excellent candidate for the high court, and we look forward to a prompt confirmation by the full Senate."
Statement by Snyder, former National Rifle Association editor, Public Affairs Director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Treasurer of the Second Amendment Foundation, and serves on the Advisory Board of the National Association of Chiefs of Police:
Snyder noted that Sotomayor said "I don't know" if an individual citizen of the United States has a right to self-defense. She said this during confirmation hearings conducted earlier this month by the Senate Judiciary Committee. She said this in response to questioning by Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
Sen. Coburn, a medical doctor, asked Sotomayor: "Do you have a personal opinion, or can you give me your opinion, of whether or not I personally, as an individual citizen, have a right to self-defense?"
Sotomayor's response was, "I --- as I said, I don't know."
Snyder said, "This exchange indicates Sotomayor does not know whether an individual has a right to defend himself or herself or even has a right to his or her own life.
"The right to self-preservation is basic to our nation, to our culture, indeed to civilization itself. To not know if this right exists is an absolute disqualifier. The fact that an individual of such ambivalence on such a fundamental matter is nominated to the highest court in the land indicates the low esteem in which the President holds individual rights. That the Senate, especially Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, even is considering the nomination can lead one to question the legitimacy of government itself. What is the purpose of government if not the protection of the rights of individuals, including the basic right of self-preservation?"
Statement of Wade Henderson, President of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights:
“Today’s vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee to recommend confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court is a significant milestone in our country’s journey toward providing equal justice under the law.
Judge Sotomayor has distinguished herself in every step of her life and legal career, including work as a prosecutor, a corporate litigator and a federal district and appellate judge. Her testimony before the Committee left no doubt about her qualifications for the court as she demonstrated a keen intellectual ability, a first-rate professionalism, and a degree of common sense that reflects the trail she has blazed as a Latina and first-generation American. The lessons that Judge Sotomayor has learned in her life will serve her and our country well in the years ahead.
Judge Sotomayor will make an outstanding addition to the Supreme Court and the Leadership Conference urges the full Senate to confirm her without delay.”
Statement by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of right-to-life organizations in all 50 states in opposition to the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor as an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court.
As a judge, Ms. Sotomayor has encountered little in the way of abortion-related litigation, either at the district court or the court of appeals. In the single ruling that she authored that bore directly on an abortion-related federal policy, Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush, the result was unambiguously governed by the precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Second Circuit. Yet, there are many troubling indications that Ms. Sotomayor believes that it is the proper role of the U.S. Supreme Court to construct and enforce constitutional doctrines on social policy questions, even where the text and history of the Constitution provide no basis for removing an issue from the realm of lawmaking by the duly elected representatives of the people.
Legal abortion on demand was imposed by seven Supreme Court justices in Roe v. Wade. Roe was an exercise in judicial legislation, aptly branded “an exercise of raw judicial power” by dissenting Justice Byron White. The ruling lacked any real basis in the text of the Constitution, and imposed a policy that was completely at odds with the intent of the lawmakers who crafted and ratified the Fourteenth Amendment.
The evidence indicates that Ms. Sotomayor approves of the Roe ruling and approves of the type of judicial activism that produced it. For a period of 12 years (1980-1992), prior to becoming a judge, Ms. Sotomayor served on the governing board of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), and for part of that time she was the chair of the PRLDEF Litigation Committee. During her tenure on the board, the PRLDEF was actively involved in litigation that attempted to persuade the Supreme Court to expand the judge-created “right to abortion,” often beyond what the Court was willing to embrace. During this period, the fund joined briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court in six abortion-related cases. These briefs urged the Court to regard abortion as a “fundamental right” (a right on the level of freedom of speech), to apply the strictest standard of scrutiny when reviewing abortion-regulated laws, and thereby to nullify informed consent requirements (including those involving ultrasound), waiting periods, parental notification requirements, restrictions on taxpayer funding of abortion, and even record keeping requirements. The PRLDEF’s own “statement of interest” in three of these cases said that the PRLDEF “opposes any efforts to overturn or in any way restrict the rights recognized in Roe v. Wade.”
Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC) applauds the Senators who have announced they will oppose her nomination. CWALAC President Wendy Wright said:
"The Sonia Sotomayor we saw in the nomination hearings was a stark contrast to the Sonia Sotomayor of the previous 55 years. Senators should not be fooled. The Judge Sotomayor that they will be voting on for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is the one that existed prior to the hearings and the one that emerged immediately after in her written responses to questions. Her chameleon-like performance at her hearings cannot erase a lifetime record of a judicial philosophy that allows for the re-interpretation of the Constitution according to her 'wise' and 'superior' personal opinion.
"We are thankful to the Senators who have said they cannot in good conscience support Judge Sotomayor. Senators like Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), Jon Kyl (R-Arizona) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) have shown great character and a serious commitment to the Constitution in standing up for justice by voting against her nomination."
Mario Diaz, Esq., CWALAC's Policy Director for Legal Issues, said, "Before the hearings Judge Sotomayor proudly argued that her background, gender and race did and should play a role in her judicial opinions. During the hearings her judicial philosophy suddenly became 'fidelity to the law.' Before the hearings she believed the Court of Appeals is where 'policy is made.' During the hearings she believed judges do not make law. Before the hearings she believed a judge does a better job when he looks at international law. During the hearings she emphatically said she would not look at international law in interpreting domestic law. Even in written questions after the hearings she went back on her word again, saying that 'in limited circumstances' international law can help us decide 'our own constitutional rights.' Judge Sotomayor, simply put, cannot be trusted. Any senator who supports her nomination is essentially gambling with our freedoms."
The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) commended the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee vote to move Judge Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court nomination forward for consideration by the full Senate. According to NALEO Executive Director Arturo Vargas:
"During the Judiciary Committee hearings on her nomination, Judge Sotomayor demonstrated the profound respect for the rule of law which has marked her distinguished career. She will bring a wealth of talent to our highest Court, which will enrich the administration of justice throughout the nation."
Mr. Vargas concluded, "The U.S. Senate now has the opportunity to approve the appointment of an exceptionally accomplished jurist who has more experience in the federal judiciary than any other person nominated to the Supreme Court in a hundred years. We urge the Senate to swiftly confirm the historic nomination of Judge Sotomayor to ensure she is seated by the first Monday in October, when the Court publicly convenes."
Voice of the People Political Action Committee, in coalition with numerous other grass roots organizations. We reject Judge Sotomayor not because of:
Questionable statements that may have been taken out of context. Nor do we reject her because of her race or gender. We oppose her nomination on substantive grounds that were barely – if ever – mentioned in her hearings.
We have long been able to count on your vote to properly represent out conservative values. We remain highly supportive of you as you continue to use your voice and your vote to represent us in the Senate.
NOW applauds the Senate Judiciary Committee's 13 to 6 vote recommending confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"At the risk of upsetting Senator Sessions, I am pleased that this 'wise Latina' is one step closer to joining Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the high court," said NOW President Terry O'Neill. "As the first Hispanic justice and only the third woman, Judge Sotomayor will add a much needed perspective to a bench dominated by white males."
"Racism and sexism have driven far too much of the public discourse about the superbly qualified Sotomayor, and all the fiery temperaments on display last week during her Senate confirmation hearing -- those outrageous questions and comments -- seemed to belong to privileged white men," said O'Neill. "Sotomayor's impressive experience should guarantee her a strong vote on the floor, and her notable rise to the high court should serve as inspiration to women and girls across the country and around the world."
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, and Kelli Conlin, president of NARAL Pro-Choice New York, issued the following joint statement announcing the organizations' support for the confirmation of President Obama's nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
"President Obama made a sound choice in nominating Judge Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. From the beginning, we have said her nomination reflects the president's commitment to ensuring that justices have strong legal credentials and understand how the law affects everyday people's lives, including the need to keep politicians from interfering in our personal, private medical decisions.
"As we outlined in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the fate of Roe v. Wade hangs in the balance, and the addition of President Bush's appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, has moved the court in a direction hostile to a woman's right to choose.
"Within the context of this change in the court's makeup, we have examined Judge Sotomayor's responses to privacy-related questions. We are pleased that Judge Sotomayor expressed stronger support for the established constitutional right to privacy than either Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Alito, both of whom had anti-choice records before being nominated to their current positions. She also articulated several times throughout the hearing that the constitutional right to privacy includes the right to choose.
"In addition, we took into consideration the significant and strong support her nomination has garnered from some of our most committed pro-choice allies in the Senate as well as President Obama's consistent record of support for Roe v. Wade and his established record of nominating to key posts individuals who share his principles.
"After engaging in this especially deliberate and thoughtful process, we are pleased to have arrived at a position in support of President Obama's first nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court."
The National Rifle Association is warning senators that it will consider their votes on Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor as part of its influential annual ratings of lawmakers. The NRA says:
President Barack Obama's first high court nominee has a hostile view of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. It announced last week that it was opposing her nomination, although her confirmation in early August is virtually ...
Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, released the following statement:
"Judge Sonia Sotomayor has given clear and responsible answers concerning the Second Amendment to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, while not pre-judging any issues that may come before her on the Supreme Court. We were impressed with her presentation. The National Rifle Association, in opposing her, is showing its true colors.
"The NRA's statement opposing Judge Sotomayor represents a shameful misrepresentation of her testimony as well as the law. The NRA, instead, wants activist Supreme Court Justices who would support their ‘any gun, anywhere, anytime' ideology. The U.S. Senate must take a stand against gun lobby extremism and confirm this superb nominee to the Supreme Court."
Comments