Wednesday, May 27, 2009

How Should The GOP Handle Judge Sotomayor?

There is a lot of hand-wringing in conservative circles over President Obama's nomination of federal judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace Justice David Souter on the supreme court.
First, the obvious.
This appointment is the worst kept secret from the Obama administration. They have had her name out there for this possible appointment oh, say the day after the election last year.
Also, Judge Sotomayor's appointment does not change anything as far as balance on the supreme court. It is a liberal for a liberal.
And, since elections do have consequences, and the Democrats have 59 to 60 seats in the senate, this should be an easy win for the Obama administration.
Now, the not so obvious is what do conservatives and Republicans do about this.
Remember, there is no way this appointment gets blocked. So anything that is done is more or less to show that Republicans have some fight left.
So, there are the voices that are saying that this is not the time or place to take on President Obama.
We have former President Bush 43 adviser Mark McKinnon saying that opposing Judge Sotomayor is the Republicans going on a suicide mission. And there is Stuart Taylor over at the National Journal offering his analysis.
And there are those such as Rush Limbaugh advocating taking Judge Sotomayor on. Also, it appears that Newt Gingrich also has some thoughts about this choice for a supreme court justice.
Here is the way I would like to see conservatives and Republicans tackle this foregone conclusion.
First, use this opportunity to expose the Sotomayor record. That is the role of a loyal opposition. Highlight those decisions that make Judge Sotomayor's record the issue.
Point out the obvious double-standards between the glowing reviews of Judge Sotomayor and another Hispanic that was appointed by former President Bush 43 to an appeals judgeship. That would be Miguel Estrada. Note that it was Democrats that filibustered Mr. Estrada's nomination in the first place.
Also, it is important to note that then then future president as a senator not only voted against both Judges Samuel Alito and John Roberts to the supreme court. Why then Sen. Messiah Barack was in favor of a filibuster against now Justice Alito. So, those who now say lets just rush this through and by acclimation should get a little taste of their own medicine.
DO NOT FILIBUSTER this nomination!
It will not stand up and will make legitimate points that will be brought up in the judiciary committee moot. People will look at a filibuster as sour grapes more than anything. And, the Republicans will not have the votes to uphold it.
At the end of the debate, every Republican should vote against Judge Sotomayor for the supreme court. Just because one is nominated does not mean that nominee should be given the post by acclimation.
It is basically threading the needle and that is the best the Republicans can do in this position. And it will be the best thing to do to expose the many judges that President Obama will nominate to the federal bench at all levels.

4 comments:

skeneogden said...

The problem for the GOP as I see it is that Republicans don't want to be branded as racists by the Left for objecting to Sotomayor's nomination.

It was a shrewd move by the president to nominate an Hispanic woman. It is just the kind of thing to tie the Right up in knots as they fall over themselves not to be too critical of someone who may not possess the bona fides to hold a seat on the Supreme Court.

The Court is all about ideology, not the strict interpretation of the Constitution. If Sotomayor swings too far to the Left, Kennedy may be inclined to side more with the conservative side of the court.

Rightwingsnarkle said...

Let's look at what Fish Man sez...

The problem for the GOP as I see it is that Republicans don't want to be branded as racists by the Left for objecting to Sotomayor's nomination.What other objection could repubs have, beyond being racists and sexists beholden to old white men of the south?

I think Bugs Bunny's Evil Twin offers good advice - all repubs should vote against her, to insure that Hispanic voters know exactly where they stand.

It was a shrewd move by the president to nominate an Hispanic woman. It is just the kind of thing to tie the Right up in knots as they fall over themselves not to be too critical of someone who may not possess the bona fides to hold a seat on the Supreme Court.Shrewd? How about overdue? White men are pretty well represented already on the Supreme Court, it seems to me.

As for allegedly "shrewd (political) moves," look no further than St. Ronnie the Demented, who publicly pledged during the '80 campaign to nominate a woman to the court because his pollsters thought his support among women was slipping.

You should also be careful about questioning Judge Sotomayor's 'bona fides,' since I'm not sure you have the ability to even make that assessment.

Princeton undergrad and Yale Law sound like good starts to me.

The Court is all about ideology, not the strict interpretation of the Constitution.Well, that's an interesting admission, coming from a wingnut. I happen to agree, since Alito, Scalito, Thomas, and Roberts are all straight-ahead wingnut political hacks.

But what happened to the wingnut talking point about 'originalists,' whatever that terms is supposed to mean?

This is the first of what's likely to be at least three first-term appointments to the court. It'll just get better from here.

skeneogden said...

RWS rolls out the same tired, hackneyed slurs as usual. This is what passes for discourse on the left. If people of his ilk have their way the re-education camps can't be too far behind, because, you know, they are always right.

Obama is just bowing to the Left's love affair with identity politics with his nomination of Sotomayor. Is she qualified? I don't know. But I didn't dismiss her nomination I only questioned her credentials to sit on the highest deliberative body in the land. Something we should do with every nominee.

Maybe we should just let the president elevate anyone to the court he so chooses without Senate oversight just because they happen to have graduated from an Ivy League law school.

DoorHold said...

Talk all you want about her past, her deeds, her record, even quote the words right out of her own mouth for all the good that'll do. In the Age Of Obama, facts don't matter any more.

Maybe we should talk about how her nomination makes us "feel" or whether or not it gives us enough "hope."