Sotomayor's Big Day Nears

CBS News Justice Correspondent Wyatt Andrews Previews the Sotomayor Hearings

(CBS)  Monday marks the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, the first hispanic nominated to the Supreme Court and only the fourth woman.

She's met with 89 Senators, faced six weeks of scrutiny, but on Monday a virtual script will unfold for the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

Democrats like Patrick Leahy will push the personal story of the girl from the projects. The Yale graduate who could have made millions, but instead started her career as a prosecutor. And she is now the first Hispanic nominee to the Supreme Court, as CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews reports.

"This judge is an example of what we tell our children they can grow up to be," said Sen. Leahy, D-Vermont.

The Republican script calls for tough but respectful questioning. What about her comments that, "a wise Latina woman. ... would ... reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life. " And speaking of white males, why did she not find that the white New Haven firefighters had a case of reverse discrimination?

"Even though it raised fundamental important constitutional questions, really important questions," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

Republicans will call Frank Ricci, one of the white firefighters who lost in front of Sotomayor, but won his case at the Supreme Court. Democrats will call former baseball player David Cone -- to thank the judge for ending the baseball strike in 1995, with a decision she reached in 15 minutes.

Absent any bombshell revelations, Sotomayor is on a glidepath to confirmation. So much so that at least 10 Republicans could support her as well.

Watch Sotomayor Hearings LIVE at CBSNews.com starting Monday.

[ahrats]

From all I heard she's a hispanic first, a New Yorker Second, and AMERICAN third. She believes the minorities should run the things even if they are not qualified. NOT MY CHOICE!, I perfer americans to run things.

[GovernmentControl]

SOTOMAYOR = UNREPENTANT RACIST

[mick7744]

What's the problem?

All Sotomayor has to do is come up with a slick sound byte like...THIS IS JUST A HIGH-TECH LYNCHING...and of course, have a couple of disgusting panderers like Orrin Hatch and Arlen Spector on hand to ease the way by asking the nominee inane questions and genuflecting to a third-rate legal mind (actually a third-rate mind of any type or description) like that of Justice Clarence Thomas...an individual who has clearly demonstrated with his bizarre opinions that he would not be worthy of his place on the bench even if he wasn?t a dirty old man getting his jollies trolling for chicks by putting pubic hairs in their drinks.

He's a moron and more than a little crazy.

[GiveMeFreedom]

Because of people like her, I have taught my children to be #1 self-reliant and #2 to pursue university and work overseas once they graduate from high school. If you are white and want to get ahead in America in the next generation, you are screwed, unless your are an ultra-liberal democrat named Kennedy, etal.

[mick7744]

Just as we have been screwed in the past by by bible-thumping ultra conservitiveRepublicans with names like Nixon, Ray-Gun, Bush (2X) Cheney and the rest of that treasonous gang of thieving SOBs.

[bondsman_dotmac]

Someone like judge Sotomayor was anticipated over two hundred years ago, there are many that think and believe that the courts will not permit the citizen to lose their rights President Thomas Jefferson was ahead of his time when he wrote: ?To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.? He believed that judges should be technical specialists but should not set policy. Now we have at least one Judge that thinks that Judges create and set policy from the bench. That same Judge feels that the Second Amendment ?gives people no rights at all when it comes to state or city laws.? Yet, the Second Amendment states quite clearly ?A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.?, it does not say the state has the right but that the people have the Right. She does wish to make laws from the bench and not for the citizen but against them.

[antoniof123]

I am betting that the Republicans try to turn this into a 1990's circus like with Clinton. This time there is a big difference we the American voters are not in the mood for it.

So let the show begin and watch the GOP head South for the next generation.

[beaumuff]

Naw, we just don't want to see another blunder like the picks Obama made for his dream team. Five tax crooks, four resign, Geithner is in it for the money, and the stimulis was a joke.

[environmental_wacko]

Wow, that's really good beaumuff. You managed to get in all the Limbaughricans talking points in one comment. You are a faithful and dependable dittohead.

[Stevenapoli7]

She's more special than the rest of us. It's true, she said so.

[Stevenapoli7]

She's more special than the rest of us. It's true, she said so.