Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Sotomayor
By James Gordon Meek
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - Judge Sonia Sotomayor won her first test vote in the Senate Tuesday, taking a major leap closer to becoming the nation's first Hispanic Supreme Court justice.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved Sotomayor, sending her nomination to the full Senate for a vote in the coming weeks. All 12 Democrats on the panel voted for the Bronx-raised appeals court judge.
Only one of the seven Republicans, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), voted "aye."
At the start of the committee's meeting, Sen. Herb Kohl (R-Wisc.) decried the lack of candor from the past three overly-cautious appointees for the high court by Presidents George W. Bush and Obama.
Kohl called it a "familiar pattern" that nominees such as Sotomayor take the "path of least resistance" by limiting their responses to senators' questions, thereby cloaking their personal views.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said Sotomayor's speeches - in which she repeatedly suggested her ethnic background make her a wiser jurist than her white male counterparts - were the "polar opposite" of her statements in her confirmation hearings this month.
"I believe she has been a tremendous judge," countered Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).
The committee is expected to vote on her nomination later Tuesday, followed by a Senate floor vote next week.
Democrats have a filibuster-proof 60 seats, and five moderate Republicans have said they'll vote for Sotomayor.
- More coverage from the New York Daily News.
Reader Comments
Put them ALL on the Court - All viewpoints
Oops. By some act of human imperfection, the title of the post ended up with the name of the poster. Sorry about that.
The correct heading was supposed to read: Put them ALL on the Court - All viewpoints.
Angie Koutrotsios
Have to disagree with those who think she will be weak.
Regardless of how she phrased the comments that she made in the past, which seem to have ruffled some feathers, this little lady has oodles of the "experience" that many were arguing they were looking for when Obama announced his run for POTUS.
He has tapped individuals, both male and female, African-American, Hispanic, Caucasian and Asian, from a variety of different backgrounds, but they seem very qualified and have that "experience."
Even if one disagrees with someone's judicial philosophy, having a variety of views on the Supreme Court ought to benefit everyone, whether left, right, or center, because it is the constant push/pull of different sides, when having the debates, that get all views and angles on the issues out onto the table. Do Americans want a one-sided Court where judicial activists from either the left or the right are just debating amongst themselves when deciding cases? The very thought is frightening.
Humans are imperfect decision makers, frequently employing cognitive shortcuts, known as heuristics, to help them come to imperfect conclusions. Hence, the best remedy for imperfect human judgment is to have not only a variety of people, but also a variety of views, in powerful positions. Any serious human errors that occur during the decision making process will be canceled out by the errors from the other side of the debate, thus (hopefully) leading to the least imperfect and more fair-minded decisions.
Put them ALL on the Court to debate the issues.
Sotomayor is very poor choice
She will be the weakest judge on the Supreme Court with a questionable bias lurking on every vote.
advertisement
