Political Hotsheet
May 6, 2009 6:23 PM

Sessions Not Necessarily Opposed To Gay Supreme Court Justice

(CBS)

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), the key Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, says that he could support a gay Supreme Court justice, The Hill reports.

“I’m not inclined to think that’s an automatic disqualification,” Session said of the prospect of a gay justice. Gay rights groups have called on President Obama to install an openly gay justice.

“I may disagree with some legal opinion on those issues, but I think fundamentally it will be up to the president to submit somebody who would unite the country and would be a clear statement of a mainstream judge who commits himself to the law,” he added.

It's a significant statement for Sessions, who was ranked the fifth most conservative U.S. senator by National Journal in 2007. Sessions also drew fire years ago for making statements that some legislators have considered racially insensitive.

The senator is well acquainted with the vagaries of judicial confirmation, having gone through that process himself in 1986 when he was nominated to a federal judgeship by President Reagan. The Senate Judiciary Committee eventually rejected his nomination.

The rest of the Republican party replied in similarly muted tones about the possibility of a gay justice. “It’s not been part of the calculus for me,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

“I don’t look at disqualifying people, I look at qualifying them. A judge who is qualified to me is someone who doesn’t legislate from the bench," added Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia.

But others warned that it may be too soon for such a step.

“It seems to me this first pick is going to be a kind of important one, and my hope is that he'll play it a little more down the middle,” GOP Chief Deputy Whip John Thune said. “A lot of people would react very negatively.”
Tags:
scotus ,
supreme court ,
sessions ,
justice ,
nominee ,
gay
Topics:
Supreme Court
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 43 Comments
by rosemam May 9, 2009 11:01 PM EDT
How do you spell "No Experience"?? Easy...O B A M A!!
Those of you Obamamaniacs who think he's doing a good job - lets not forget that there were many who thought Hitler was doing a good job too - till it was too late. Those of us with common sense who didn't vote for obama just have to sit back and watch the media lift him up as a god, and watch him destroy everthing around him.
Reply to this comment
by rational_1 May 7, 2009 12:35 PM EDT
You're noting more than typical Republican bigot. You whine about programs like affirmative action, claiming it gives some 'unqualified black aplicant' a job or spot in a college over the so-called 'hard working white person'. ..

...Affirmative action has done nothing to you. It is probably your own laziness that got you where you are, wherever that is...
Posted by tj217-2009 at 6:49 AM : May 7, 2009

First of all, I've never voted for a Republican in my life, so that addresses that point. Secondly, I never said that affirmative action wasn't helpful in the past, but I view it now as a crutch. If you see other people of your ethnic group, race. gender, whatever getting into jobs or schools because of affirmative action whereas you got in through your own hard work, wouldn't you be ticked that people thought YOU also got in without having the grades or qualifications of others? I sure would. For example, for people who got into medical school under affirmative action rules but with lower MCAT scores or GPAs than the other accepted students, do you think the general population will trust them as doctors as much as those other applicants who didn't get cut a break in admissions? Or would there be some wariness? Would you like to be lumped in with them even if you didn't gain entrance by affirmative action rules? That's the downside to affirmative action.

Your last point - I'm not lazy. Try getting tenure in a neuroscience department at a research university and then get back to me about being lazy.
Reply to this comment
by pensacola8-2009 May 7, 2009 11:00 AM EDT
I wonder if Senator Session would be agreeable to legislation that rewrites the IRS tax code that replaces the wording of 'Married' or 'Marriage', with 'Civil Union' and grants the tax exemption or treatment. Under such a law, any form of civil union would be possible as currently dictated by states and replace the 'marriage license', with a 'civil union license' leaving the wording of marriage to used and controlled by 501c3's (Churches) .

If civil union rights were extended as a matter of economic unity between two adults for economic and taxation purposes, it would get government out of the marriage morality business and permit closure allowing the government to get on with other more important business.
Reply to this comment
by endurorob May 7, 2009 9:57 AM EDT
You're taking me too seriously - this is just my way of taking a jab at affirmative action and all this talk about the expected sex/color/orientation of the next Justice. It should absolutely be about picking the most qualified candidate and not the most qualified black handicapped lesbian candidate. We'll see just how much better a job Obama makes with his pick - he has already made serious missteps in some of his selections for posts in his government (all the income tax forgetting)
Posted by rational_1


There is a story about his nomination for Deputy Secratary Department of Housong and Urban Development being involved in the illegal withholding of public records concerning the King Dome and the new Qwest Field. I have only seen it in one news outlet so far.
Reply to this comment
by hakori May 7, 2009 9:36 AM EDT
167irishboy...you are right....it's just your opinion, and quite frankly it's an opinion you don't even have enough sense to be embarrased about. You use the same dehumanizing arguements that racists used in the past to justify the continued illegality of interracial marriages. Tell a gay couple who've been together longer than you've been born that their relationship is on par with beastality and should have no right to what you take for granted! Fortunately you're becoming a relic of the past.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-15 May 7, 2009 9:19 AM EDT
Posted by rational_1 at 6:04 AM : May 7, 2009

You are talking about hypothetical people ... Bush wanted Harriet Myers for a job for which she had absolutely no experience. Obama, so for, is doing a much better job ...
Posted by abbe91 at 6:09 AM : May 7, 2009





It was worse than that:

At the time Meiers was nominated, she hadn't even been in a courtroom, in OVER 19 YEARS!!!!

She was a "political adviser", rather than a lawyer or judge that was actually practicing law during that time!!
Reply to this comment
by rational_1 May 7, 2009 9:13 AM EDT
You are talking about hypothetical people ... Bush wanted Harriet Myers for a job for which she had absolutely no experience. Obama, so for, is doing a much better job ...
Posted by abbe91 at 6:09 AM : May 7, 2009

You're taking me too seriously - this is just my way of taking a jab at affirmative action and all this talk about the expected sex/color/orientation of the next Justice. It should absolutely be about picking the most qualified candidate and not the most qualified black handicapped lesbian candidate. We'll see just how much better a job Obama makes with his pick - he has already made serious missteps in some of his selections for posts in his government (all the income tax forgetting)
Reply to this comment
by abbe91 May 7, 2009 9:09 AM EDT
A woman, yes, but white and able-bodied and as far as I know, straight.
Posted by rational_1 at 6:04 AM : May 7, 2009

You are talking about hypothetical people ... Bush wanted Harriet Myers for a job for which she had absolutely no experience. Obama, so for, is doing a much better job ...
Reply to this comment
by rational_1 May 7, 2009 9:04 AM EDT
Posted by rational_1 at 5:51 AM : May 7, 2009

For me, the holy grail of affirmative action was Harriet Myers.
Posted by abbe91 at 5:54 AM : May 7, 2009

A woman, yes, but white and able-bodied and as far as I know, straight. Obama can do better than that. Yes, he can!

Ginsburg is helping out on this - she's already a woman and rapidly approaching infirmity. If she comes out of the closet, then diversity will be pretty well represented on the Court and Obama can then just dump another white male on the Bench.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-15 May 7, 2009 8:58 AM EDT
Imagine if they can find a black lesbian in a wheelchair - the Holy Grail of affirmative action! Hope she actually went to law school or is Obama going to allow 'life experiences' to substitute for legal training?
Posted by rational_1 at 5:51 AM : May 7, 2009





Ala "Harriet Meiers"?
Reply to this comment
by abbe91 May 7, 2009 8:54 AM EDT
Posted by rational_1 at 5:51 AM : May 7, 2009

For me, the holy grail of affirmative action was Harriet Myers.
Reply to this comment
by abbe91 May 7, 2009 8:53 AM EDT
Posted by Wolfear at 5:45 AM : May 7, 2009

I don't know why ... with this topic, it's always tempting to quote Niemoller ...
Reply to this comment
by rational_1 May 7, 2009 8:51 AM EDT
Imagine if they can find a black lesbian in a wheelchair - the Holy Grail of affirmative action! Hope she actually went to law school or is Obama going to allow 'life experiences' to substitute for legal training?
Reply to this comment
by abbe91 May 7, 2009 8:50 AM EDT
"If a person is gay , they have some sort of metal defect..
Posted by the_sir_mr at 5:39 PM : May 6, 2009"

Sure, and a simple magnet would let you find out ...
Reply to this comment
by Wolfear May 7, 2009 8:45 AM EDT
OK... "Brokeback Justice"? That's funny I don't care who you are. To all of the gay haters out there and those that don't feel Gay people should have any jobs of importance... Please keep in mind that if you end up in a car crash tonight you won't have the luxury of checking the orientation of those people that save your life. Get over it. Live with it.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-15 May 7, 2009 8:42 AM EDT
Would they be opposed to a Supreme Court Justice that was in a relationship with a farm animal? Just wondering when people will be allowed to start marrying llamas? People that want to marry their llamas, but are afraid to express their right to marry llamas, are discriminated against and should be considered for the Supreme Court as well as anyone else. Just my opinion.
Posted by 167irishboy at 9:49 PM : May 6, 2009
********************************************************

Agreed, but first we would have to legalize human-dog marriage,human-cat marriage,horse-human marriage,human-cow marriage and so on.
Posted by BaghdadsHere10 at 4:40 AM : May 7, 2009






What part of "consenting adults" completely stumps you? Is the concept REALLY that hard to understand?
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-15 May 7, 2009 8:39 AM EDT
You just confirmed the Validity of the Bible. Thank you.
Posted by Culture_Warrior_in_09 at 11:26 PM : May 6, 2009




Was it the talking snake, the 950 year old men, the "flood" that covered the entire world but somehow spared the Chinese, Indians, etc, etc?
Reply to this comment
by May 7, 2009 8:15 AM EDT
Wait a minute!

How about a Supreme Court Justice who actually practiced "law"? Now, not one of the 9 luminaries ever revealed the precise nature of any of their private law practices and I suggest not one ever actually represented a client in a court room.
Reply to this comment
by skyk-2009 May 7, 2009 6:57 AM EDT
Would they be opposed to a Supreme Court Justice that was in a relationship with a farm animal? Just wondering when people will be allowed to start marrying llamas? People that want to marry their llamas, but are afraid to express their right to marry llamas, are discriminated against and should be considered for the Supreme Court as well as anyone else. Just my opinion.
Posted by 167irishboy at 9:49 PM : May 6, 2009

You REALLY need to expand your lack of education here! That Sixth Grade Education of yours isn't going to cut it anymore.
Reply to this comment
by flreason May 7, 2009 6:16 AM EDT
Of course he wouldn't object to a gay Supreme Court Justice. It would be so helpful in the next election in galvanizing the fundamentalist Christian electorate. Let's hope that the Obama Administration doesn't rise to the bait.
Reply to this comment
See all 43 Comments

About Political Hotsheet

Stay up to the minute on the latest news and developments from Washington, from the White House to Congress and everything in-between with the best political reporters from CBS News and CBSNews.com.

E-Mail Political Hotsheet
Follow On Twitter

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
  • MOST POPULAR
HOTSHEET ON TWITTER