Via Ben Smith, I’m surprised we are not seeing more of this:
I’ve already stated that I have no intention to watch the Sotomayor hearings, and I made it all day without hearing about it until I listened to NPR on the way back from the gym. Having said that, I do find it is telling that there is so little interest in this pick. When Alito and Roberts were picked, I remember ad campaigns and a huge push to get them confirmed (as well as a push to block the confirmation). I’m as dialed in to politics as I was then, and I’m just not seeing the same level of intensity. Despite the Republicans best efforts, they really just don’t have anything, and choice is just stereotypical Obama- safe, inside the box, deliberate, and careful. No sudden moves, and limit the opposition’s options.
Zifnab
The O’Conner spot was considered a key swing vote on the court. Replacing Sandra Day with a frothing winger would push the court decidedly to the right. Replacing her with another stealth-liberal like Souter could set back the right-wing agenda decades. So it was kinda a big deal when the GOP got Alito in.
Replacing Souter himself with an Obama appointee isn’t about maintaining the balance of the court. The Republicans were never going to see a right-wing nomination. They already know that. At best, they’re going to see a moderate and at worst someone slightly to the left of Ginsberg. But, as Souter and Ginsberg weren’t that far apart, it’s not a catastrophic loss.
There was a lot less concern about Renquist’s replacement, Roberts, because A) Renquist had been preening Roberts for the better part of a decade to inherit his spot, and B) Renquist wasn’t much less right-wing than Scalia, he was just less of an ass about it. The Roberts nomination wasn’t much more of a big deal than Sotomayor’s is. The Right just pushed the abortion issue hard (like they do on every SCOTUS pick) and we got to revisit the debate… again. That issue isn’t as big a deal this time around.
General Winfield Stuck
The fur will fly, only if Scalia gets crushed by his massive ego , or if Thomas autoasphyxiates himself at that special moment.
JGabriel
John Cole @ Top:
In a way, it’s almost too safe. I mean, Sotomayor is the kind of centrist pick you make when the Senate is split 52-48. With a 60-40 split, you’d think Obama could go a little more radical and save the safe picks for later in his term if/when the Republicans get more votes.
.
Perry Como
Kyl gave a a special opening statement this morning (I think it was Kyl), where he recited the “80% of your decisions that went to the Supreme Court were overturned” meme. I look forward to the smackdown. But overall, you haven’t missed anything. Well, other than Senator AL FRANKEN speaking in a SCOTUS nominee hearing.
LULZ.
General Winfield Stuck
@JGabriel:
That’s what it appears now. But I’m betting that she will become The liberal Lion of the modern SCOTUS, A Brennan with curls. She can spread her wings now and let her freak flag fly.
eric
The real interesting aspect will be how the spanish language networks cover the hearings. The only thing really at play during the hearings is the standing of the GOP among Latinos and, to a lesser extent, minorities more broadly.
The GOP just cannot help itself.
eric
The Grand Panjandrum
If Obama has the opportunity to replace Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas or Kennedy you will see the GOP machine whip the wingnuts into a hysterical mass of foaming at the mouth craziness. Until then they will probably sit quietly by while a Republican official gives Rush a very public reach around.
Demo Woman
John I missed most of the hearing since I could only watch between two and three. Someone mentioned Sheldon Whitehouses’ statement and I found it on youtube. You should listed to that statement alone. link
hells littlest angel
Stereotypically?
JGabriel
@General Winfield Stuck:
I hope you’re right. I don’t see anything in her judicial record to indicate that, though. And we still need another liberal voice on the bench to change the balance. Thank the FSM that Souter hung in there as long as he did.
.
Just Some Fuckhead
@General Winfield Stuck:
No way, this is just wishful thinking. But I’ll take you’re bet, your gonna regret, ‘cos I’m the best that’s ever been.
PeakVT
Slightly OT: The graphic at the bottom of this post is useful anytime you hear whining about the courts being “too liberal”.
John Cole
@hells littlest angel: Thanks.
AhabTRuler
@John Cole: You have a trusty army of copy editors? I thought they were extinct.
geg6
She’s a one for one with Souter. No more and no less. I do not expect her to be an idiot and she won’t be letting any freak flags fly. The hysteria over her has only shown how ridiculous the GOP will be about any SCOTUS pick. And make it easier to get the public to ignore them when it’s essential. Like when, hopefully, Nino eats himself into a heart attack someday soon.
donovong
I couldn’t help myself and listened to most of the opening rounds. The illustrious Senator Sessions (R-Klan) did not disappoint, followed closely by Kyl.
Graham (and, again, this is more painful than you can imagine) was the sane Republican voice, conceding that she is a slam-dunk.
Unlike General Winfield, I have concerns that she will turn out to be a closet Scalia, but that is probably just my “W” hangover talking.
Dennis-SGMM
It sure would be interesting to have heard that part of Obama’s discussion with Sotomayor regarding the way she interprets the Constitution. Is she an Originalist or does she believe that the Constitution is a living document? I haven’t read anything by her that gives any insight into her thinking on this. For a Supreme this is, to me, very important stuff.
AnotherBruce
@geg6:
Exactly, I’m not buying that the constant roar of bitching by the GOP and their Maximum Leader Rush is going to necessarily scare Obama out of making a very progressive SC pick next time. I think Obama learned during the campaign that the volume is always turned up all the way with the republicans, and the public is either getting annoyed with it or turning them off altogether.
AhabTRuler
My Voodoo doll is set on “pancreatic cancer.”
ETA: I find it very difficult to wish ill on another human being…
…but with certain human beings I have learned to live with it. If it makes you feel any better, I would settle for his being impeached and convicted. Not my fault the SC is a lifetime appt.
Zifnab
Too many “moderate” Democrats for that. We have the Senate by the numbers, but we don’t have it by the votes. Not when a single defection from a waffling Red State Senator means guaranteed filibuster.
Besides, the GOP has been doing a glorious job shooting itself in the foot by making this a fight over Sotomayor’s minority status. If Obama locks up the Hispanic vote for another ten years, I won’t be in the least bit surprised. I’m just waiting for him to bring immigration reform to the table.
He’s picked a good left-leaning justice. This will be an excellent opportunity for him to get a solid win on his score card. And he can keep his powder dry for health care and climate bills. If the GOP wants to dump all it’s fighting strength into the Sotomayor nomination, go ahead and let them.
kay
“she signed a document, that I have in my file, opposing the death penalty” – Senator Hatch
What does that even mean? What sort of “document”? I think he has to produce that. He’s making stuff up.
hells littlest angel
No, I’m no grammar-prig. I mean since when has Obama been stereotyped as safe or inside the box? Seems a bit harsh or dismissive. If you wanted off-the-wall, you could have voted for McCain. Don’t knock Obama for being smart. Yeah, I’d like to see Noam Chomsky as the nominee, and Obama vowing to legalize drugs, but I’d rather have universal health care.
General Winfield Stuck
@Just Some Fuckhead:
I never bet with that devil down in Georgia.. Besides, when the historians make their call, we’ll all be dead. Just ask Danger Monkey/
eric
@Zifnab: We confirm with the Senate we have not the Senate we want.
eric
robertdsc
That’s not what’s being offered.
Linkmeister
@kay: Did he really say that? That’s very McCarthy-esque.
eric
@Linkmeister: So, a mormon is going to go after a catholic. my how much fun that will be….there is not enough popcorn for all the different permutations of GOP fail at these hearings.
eric
Dennis-SGMM
@kay:
Orrin Hatch signed a document, that I have in my file, stating that he enjoys fellating dead pigs.
eric
@Dennis-SGMM: that is an insult to dead-pig fellators everywhere.
Have you no decency?
eric
General Winfield Stuck
@kay:
I’ve been following Hatch for years and he is a bonified pathological liar, and you will never see him on the Teevee with a democrat to call him on his horseshit.
inkadu
@AhabTRuler:
Just to clarify Ahab’s awesome statement: Balloon Juice does not advocate violence against Justice Scalia nor anyone else on the Supreme Court; but it would be so cool to see Nino swallow a stick of dynamite.
inkadu
The junior senator from Minnesota is happy.
AhabTRuler
@inkadu: “Judge So-toe-my-air”! Win!
ETA: he pointedly catches the pronunciation it on the second time around. Double Win! !
JGabriel
Dennis-SGMM:
I’m betting on living document. A female originalist would have to deny herself the right to vote.
.
jnfr
@PeakVT:
Thanks very much for that link. The graphic is quite illuminating.
inkadu
@AhabTRuler: I wonder what the heckling was about. Unfortunately, the guy picked about the worst time to heckle — right as Franken was talking about Kennedy. Franken’s got discipline, too, it would have been a perfect time to stick in a little comic zinger, like, “Don’t worry, Chairman, that’s only the first time I’ve been heckled as a Senator.”
He’s got that seat for life; unless Bachman’s troops are clone-breeding an army that reaches voting age in 5 years.
And I think Al was trying to spin a spanish pronunciation of Sotomayor (which was about right) but decided against the second time around.
gbear
@Demo Woman: I’ll second the recommendation of Sheldon Whitehouses’ statement. Here’s a sample (not blockquoted):
It is fair to inquire into a nominee’s judicial philosophy, and we will here have a serious and fair inquiry. But the pretence that Republican nominees embody modesty and restraint, or that Democratic nominees must be activists, runs starkly counter to recent history.
I particularly reject the analogy of a judge to an “umpire” who merely calls “balls and strikes.” If judging were that mechanical, we would not need nine Supreme Court Justices. The task of an appellate judge, particularly on a court of final appeal, is often to define the strike zone, within a matrix of Constitutional principle, legislative intent, and statutory construction.
The “umpire” analogy is belied by Chief Justice Roberts, though he cast himself as an “umpire” during his confirmation hearings. Jeffrey Toobin, a well-respected legal commentator, has recently reported that “[i]n every major case since he became the nation’s seventeenth Chief Justice, Roberts has sided with the prosecution over the defendant, the state over the condemned, the executive branch over the legislative, and the corporate defendant over the individual plaintiff.” Some umpire. And is it a coincidence that this pattern, to continue Toobin’s quote, “has served the interests, and reflected the values of the contemporary Republican party”? Some coincidence.
For all the talk of “modesty” and “restraint,” the right wing Justices of the Court have a striking record of ignoring precedent, overturning congressional statutes, limiting constitutional protections, and discovering new constitutional rights: the infamous Ledbetter decision, for instance; the Louisville and Seattle integration cases; the first limitation on Roe v. Wade that outright disregards the woman’s health and safety; and the DC Heller decision, discovering a constitutional right to own guns that the Court had not previously noticed in 220 years. Some “balls and strikes.” Over and over, news reporting discusses “fundamental changes in the law” wrought by the Roberts Court’s right wing flank. The Roberts Court has not kept the promises of modesty or humility made when President Bush nominated Justices Roberts and Alito.
So, Judge Sotomayor, I’d like to avoid codewords, and look for a simple pledge from you during these hearings: that you will respect the role of Congress as representatives of the American people; that you will decide cases based on the law and the facts; that you will not prejudge any case, but listen to every party that comes before you; and that you will respect precedent and limit yourself to the issues that the Court must decide; in short, that you will use the broad discretion of a Supreme Court Justice wisely
inkadu
@Dennis-SGMM: Living Document vs Originalist — It’s kind of two flavors of bullshit. It’s a political game, not a legal one.
“Original intent” is just a political way to buy legal cover for a conservative agenda… they really don’t give a fuck about original intent.
And neither approach helps you settle cases. If it’s a living document you have to prove your ruling follows the organic growth of the constitution — whatever that means — and if it’s original intent you have to prove it’s what the framers would have wanted. Both of those are pretty flighty cases to make, which is why we have established case law and a tradition of respecting precedent — it’s a lot more solid.
Can you imagine a supreme court justice saying, “I appreciate the many amicus briefs I have received and the diligent work of my interns in retrieving 200 years of relevant case law, precedents, developments and related cases. But I am deciding this case based on the documents I have assembled, the last of which is dated 1788.” That’s original intent. I don’t see original intent guys doing that.
And what if the original intent of the founders was to create a living document?
Origuy
Glenn Beck whined about the “softball questions“, but no questions were asked today.
AhabTRuler
You have it reversed. He failed miserably on the first attempt, but managed to correct himself on the second pass.
DemonDem
Open question on which I have no opinion (yet):
We’re more or less six months into this Presidency, and I’ve been hearing a recurring theme:
1) The stimulus is too watered down, it’s not aggressive enough.
2) Sotomayor is the “safe, inside-the-box” pick for SCOTUS.
3) He isn’t being forceful enough on issues like gay marriage and “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
4) He’s being too centrist on healthcare, not advocating for a public option as strongly as he should.
Setting aside the fact that I personally agree with all of the above statements, I remember a lot of talk during the campaign that one of the things about Obama’s candidacy was that his lack of a legislative record made him something of a “blank slate” onto which others could project their desires.
So, my question becomes: is what we are seeing Obama being too weak, or is Obama being Obama? Perhaps his position is turning out to be more that of a pragmatic centrist than the liberal lion some of us had hoped?
As I said, I haven’t made up my mind, and even if it turns out to be the latter, I still think he’s doing a fine job so far (though I disagree with some of his positions,) but I am left to wonder if we’re seeing the “real” Obama, and it’s a bit less stridently liberal than some of us expected?
This is the part where you all tell me I’m crazy….
Molly
@donovong: The illustrious Senator Sessions (R-Klan)
The “Klan” comment made snort tea up my nose when I laughed. Hate it when that happens, but it does clear the sinuses.
Well done.
Just Some Fuckhead
@inkadu: Obviously conservatives think the Constitution is a living document or they wouldn’t be trying to kill it.
Brachiator
@AhabTRuler:
“I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction.”
— Clarence Darrow, The Story of My Life
Origuy — Glenn Beck whined about the “softball questions“, but no questions were asked today.
Beck lost his place in the “Official GOP Pre-rehearsed faux-spontaneous reactions to Obama” playbook and got ahead of himself.
AhabTRuler
I’ll have to steal that. In the meantime, it’s always wise to remember that sooner or later, it can (will?) be said of us all.
General Winfield Stuck
@Origuy:
Teevee reception has gone to shit in The Doom Room ever since Obama blocked Beck’s special signals.
mai naem
I like Al Franken’s statement. I just hope I can see him beyond his SNL characters. I used to listen to his Air America show and I read the books so I know he’s sharp.
I watched Kyl’s statement. It’s a pity his election isn’t till 2012 because I would have loved to see this stuff aimed at Latino voters in his home state of Arizona. What a dick. Hatch is two faced twit too. He’s the one who pulled the blue slip rule when it didn’t suit him and then wanted it back when the Repubs lost control.
Personally, on just a gut feeling, I unfortunately think Sotomayor is going to be the Souter of a Dem admin pick. It’s just a gut feeling but I think she’s going to end up being center right. I hope I am completely and totally wrong. I am hoping her ethnic background and her sex is going to be the more accurate predictor than my gut.
josefina
@DemonDem: Perhaps his position is turning out to be more that of a pragmatic centrist than the liberal lion some of us had hoped?
This. And, really, it shouldn’t be much of a surprise. He didn’t get from where he started to where he is by being a rabblerousing firebrand.
I have a friend who was at HLS at the same time as Obama, though she didn’t know him well; she was focused on activism not Law Review. (And today she’s a human-rights litigator.) But she always remembered him because he would actually shut up and listen—incredibly rare in that hyper-competitive, hyper-verbal population. In a debate, there was no rancor; he made the other person feel that their argument had been heard and considered. Which served him extremely well.
There’s no way a “liberal lion” (e.g., Kucinich) will ever be elected president. I’ll take a leftish president who’s very smart and very deft at playing this game.
DemonDem
@ Josephina –
An excellent point, and as I had said, I still haven’t made my mind up as to how I feel about it. That said, you’re right that there will not be a “liberal lion” in the truest sense of the phrase elected president, but I do think a lot of people felt that he was going to get elected and fulfill a lot of liberal dreams – hell, he still might. Even so, as you point out, much about his background suggested that we are getting exactly what we should have expected.
The funny thing about all of this is that, as frustrated as some may be, it is exactly that ability – to sit, listen, and make others feel as if they have been listened to – that has done, I think, a huge amount to repair our reputation internationally. It hasn’t done anything to quell the GOP fire-breathers, but we’ve asked the man to heal the sick, not raise the dead….
Nellcote
@DemonDem:
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/politics/stories/coal-and-clear-skies-obama%E2%80%99s-balancing-act
The past as prologue…
hamletta
@DemonDem: I don’t know where you got the idea Obama was a liberal lion, especially if Kucinich is your marker. I always knew he was a bit to my right. Maybe you watch too much FOX or something.
He’s a good, solid liberal, but he’s very careful, and very pragmatic. And freakishly savvy about politics. He understands the importance of popular support for his agenda, and he knows how to get it.
I don’t want him to impose my dream agenda on the country, I want him to sell it to the people, and I want to pitch in.