"It is a curse to have the epic temperament in an age devoted to snappy bits."
- J.R.R. Tolkien
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Mr. Chairman, Vice President Biden has recently written a glowing endorsement of Judge Sotomayor, citing her legal qualifications and experience.
I would like to read this statement into the record, from last year's VP debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin.
IFILL: Final question tonight, before your closing statements, starting with you, Senator Biden. Can you think of a single issue -- and this is to cast light for people who are just trying to get to know you in your final debate, your only debate of this year -- can you think of a single issue, policy issue, in which you were forced to change a long-held view in order to accommodate changed circumstances?
BIDEN: Yes, I can. When I got to the United States Senate and went on the Judiciary Committee as a young lawyer, I was of the view and had been trained in the view that the only thing that mattered was whether or not a nominee appointed, suggested by the president had a judicial temperament, had not committed a crime of moral turpitude, and was -- had been a good student.
And it didn't take me long -- it was hard to change, but it didn't take me long, but it took about five years for me to realize that the ideology of that judge makes a big difference.
That's why I led the fight against Judge Bork. Had he been on the court, I suspect there would be a lot of changes that I don't like and the American people wouldn't like, including everything from Roe v. Wade to issues relating to civil rights and civil liberties.
And so that -- that -- that was one of the intellectual changes that took place in my career as I got a close look at it. And that's why I was the first chairman of the Judiciary Committee to forthrightly state that it matters what your judicial philosophy is. The American people have a right to understand it and to know it.
But I did change on that, and -- and I'm glad I did.
I appreciate Vice President Biden's forthrightness on this issue. For that reason, I'd like to ask you Judge Sotomayor, "What is your judicial philosophy? The American People have a right to understand it and know it. And please know that if your idealogy does not line up with that of my constituents, or if I suspect that I won't like your future decisions, that I will vote against you just as then Vice Presidential-hopeful Biden said I should.
Trackbacks:
Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/5431.
Comments on "If I Had A Voice At Sotomayor's Confirmation Hearings...":
2. Bob Sacamento
- 05/29/2009 8:18 am CDT
Philip,
Zinnnnnnngggg!!!
Excellent!
I am willing (like it matters) to give her the benefit of the doubt until her full record is made public. The isolated statements she is being hammered on might be only isolated statements that look different in context.
But it really bothers me that her Washington defenders -- the ones I have heard -- aren't trying to offer any context for these statements. They just want us to forget them and look at the number of years she has on the bench, as well as her gender and race.
In other words, they don't want us looking at her judicial philosophy or speculating on how she might rule in cases we find important!
Excellent post!
3. Raindream
- 05/29/2009 12:12 pm CDT
That could be a good question. I like what Linda Chavez points out too, that asking her if her statement that a wise Latina woman would be a better judge than a wise white man because of life experience meant judges should base their opinions on life experience or the law. That and questions like that would get at her philosophy also.
4. Roy
- 05/31/2009 2:56 pm CDT
Does anyone (left, middle, or right)doubt they know Sotomayor's judicial philosophy?
That philosophy stands out so clearly that senatorial votes will serve as a litmus test of the senator doing the voting.
5. Andrew
- 05/31/2009 4:13 pm CDT
Does anyone (left, middle, or right)doubt they know Sotomayor's judicial philosophy?
I could ballpark it, but I don't think I could say I know her judicial philosophy based on a few statements and controversial decisions. I could tell you whether I think she'll be more like Antonin Scalia or John Paul Stevens, but that doesn't mean I know how she'll rule in every situation.
That philosophy stands out so clearly that senatorial votes will serve as a litmus test of the senator doing the voting.
I think that's unfair.
Leave a Comment:
Biden said, I suspect there would be a lot of changes that I don't like and the American people wouldn't like, including everything from Roe v. Wade to issues relating to civil rights and civil liberties.
Note to V.P. Biden: Maybe you should change your position on SCOTUS standards again.
Most Americans are against abortion now.
Maybe you should have voted for Bork. Apparently, he was more fore-sighted than you are.