Sotomayor Braces For Round Three

In First Full Day fof Questioning, Supreme Court Nominee Defends Record During Senate Hearings

(CBS/ AP)  Sonia Sotomayor is relying on her 17-year record as a federal judge to rebut criticism that she is concealing a liberal agenda that will show up if she is confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Sotomayor, the first Hispanic high court nominee, was set to return Wednesday to a cavernous Senate hearing room for another grueling day of questioning.

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are using Sotomayor's confirmation hearing to raise doubts about her fairness, while Democrats are portraying the 55-year-old New Yorker as a model jurist.

"I suspect the White House is delighted with the nominee's first day under questioning," CBS News chief legal analyst Andrew Cohen says. "She didn't make any gaffes, she kept her cool, she didn't reveal many hints about her positions in future cases and she explained patiently all those out-of-court statements that got her in a bit of trouble."

Under questioning Tuesday, Sotomayor tried to take away one line of Republican attack when she distanced herself from the man who nominated her, President Barack Obama.

Asked whether she shared Mr. Obama's view - stated when he was a senator - that in some cases, the key determinant is "what is in the judge's heart," Sotomayor said she does not.

"I wouldn't approach the issue of judging in the way the president does," she said. "Judges can't rely on what's in their heart. They don't determine the law. Congress makes the laws. The job of a judge is to apply the law."

Time and again, she put her record on display to answer charges of bias.

Sotomayor backed away from perhaps the most damaging words that had been brought up since Mr. Obama nominated her seven weeks ago - a comment she made on several occasions suggesting that a "wise Latina" judge would usually reach better conclusions than a white man. She called the remark "a rhetorical flourish that fell flat."

"It was bad because it left an impression that I believed that life experiences commanded a result in a case, but that's clearly not what I do as a judge," Sotomayor said.

Republicans were not satisfied with her answers.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said he could end up voting for Sotomayor but wants to make sure she is the judge with what he called a moderately liberal record, not a liberal activist.

"That's what we're trying to figure out - who are we getting here?" he said.

Despite the Republican attacks, Cohen says, "you get the sense that even they don't really have a ton of ammunition to use against her - remember she was twice confirmed by this same Committee in the 1990s."

Democrats clearly enjoyed being on the other side of the confirmation process, defending a Democratic nominee.

"When we asked questions of the white male nominees of a Republican president, we were basically trying to ... make sure that they would go far enough in understanding the plight of minorities, because clearly that was not in their DNA," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said.

"The questions being asked of you from the other side primarily are along the lines of, will you go too far in siding with minorities?" Durbin said.

Republicans focused on one case to make that point, the appeals court ruling that she joined dismissing the claim of white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., who alleged racial discrimination over the city's decision to scrap a promotions exam after too few minorities did well.

The Supreme Court reversed the ruling late last month.

Sotomayor's response was simple and oft-repeated: "We were following precedent."

When the committee finishes its first round of questioning, it will go into the customary closed session to discuss the FBI report on Sotomayor and other personal matters.

The 19 senators can then take up to an additional 20 minutes each to question Sotomayor, although Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the committee chairman, advised his colleagues Tuesday that they don't need to use their entire allotment.

Leahy has voiced confidence that Sotomayor will be confirmed, and with some Republican support.

More coverage of the Sotomayor confirmation hearings:

Sotomayor Pressed on Gun Rights

Republicans Aren't Sold on "Wise Latina" Explanation

Sotomayor Goes to Rope-a-Dope Strategy

Analysis: Sotomayor Has Been Very Cautious

Sotomayor: Abortion Law Is "Settled"

Sotomayor Treads Lightly On Gun Issue

Sotomayor Hearings Update: Is She a Prop for Larger Fight?

Sotomayor Promises "Fidelity to the Law"

Sotomayor Hearings as Partisan Platform

Sotomayor's Confirmation To-Do List

[thgdriver]

This is a job for life and some would give their life to get it. Her lying is very clear to any thinking person. In the case of the firemen, reverse discrimination was extremely clear yet she sided with the city government. The supreme court overturned her biased decision and rightly so. Her past statements speak volumes about the way she truly thinks. She comes across to me now as a chronic, habitual, LIAR that will say whatever it takes to get this very prestigious job

[pw08-2009]

Right after I poosted my last comment, CBS buried this story way down into another section...What a joke...did ou need to make room for yet another Sotomayor Drama story?

[pw08-2009]

Sotomayor braces for round three?

Try the public, who is sick of our lazy news organizations that try to make this something that we all care about because I did, for like the first day.

We all know that this is nothing but a show and that she'll get confirmed eventhough she hates white men.

Problem is that this is the only story, next to the Michael Jackson murder investigation that news agencies report EVERY DAY...because they are lazy.

Someone will tell me how wrong I am, but that will be a person that has no freaking life and loves the drama and people are sick of the manufactured drama that the media loves to create...

[isidorordl]

As a federal trial/appellate private practitioner for more than three decades, I support Sotomayor appointment based on her holding that government employees, including judges, are not above the law (see, John Malesko v. Correctional Services Corporation, 229 F.3rd. 374 (2000), rev?d 534 U.S. 61 (2001)[Sotomayor affirmed right of individual to sue a private corporation working as an instrumentality of federal government for violations of constitutional rights]).

As an old long time Republican, I find that the "conservative Republican" Senators statements both surreal and hypocritical, based on my three decades of federal litigation. This experience confirms that the Rehnquist/Roberts Court has a policy of conspiring with government attorneys to deprive citizens rights under the Rule of Law and Constitution, i.e Justices Roberts, Stevens, Souter, Scalia, Thomas, et al., have held that they need not follow stare decisis; that both the Executive and Judicial Branch are absolutely immune from accountability for tortious and criminal acts, that the Bill of Rights is replaced by the Bill of Obligation; and that they can criminally affirm void orders issued in violation of federal statutory rights.

In this context because neither the Bush nor Obama White House, nor Congress, and nor the Virginia General Assembly have acted on my repeated petitions for an investigation of malfeasance of Federal and Virginia government attorneys, Beltway Lobbyist/Attorney Eric Holder, and judges, conspiracy obstructing my statutory right as a father and depriving me of my right to employment as a Virginia attorney (see, 2009 presentation to Northern VA Delegates, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAkEfjcA5sQ, and (http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml), I just filed a criminal complaint for treason and obstruction of justice, misprision of felony, and business conspiracy in violation of Va. Code §§ 18.2-481, 482, and 499, by by Republican candidate for Governor, former Att. Gen Bob McDonnell, Virginia government attorney and judges (http://home.earthlink.net/~treason/).

Query, if I as an experienced federal litigator cannot protect myself and Son from the malfeasance by government attorneys and judges denying access to an impartial jury trial and court--what is a young attorney or laymen parent to do to protect his and his children rights?

Isidoro Rodriguez, Esq., Member in Good Standing of the Bar of the United States Supreme Court

[cregis]

If Sotomayor's confirmation is a done deal, why are these Senators a wating our tax dollars with this hearing? Could it be that the tax payers are paying for these Senators to get their faces on tv and for them to be able to lecture the judge? I don't know if I would like the judge personally, maybe, but I do know that she has been treated with condescension and with bias. Sessioms is clearing a racist and Graham has shown himself to be a condescending sexist. I don't understand how any woman could vote for him.

[zonkzilla]

OK here it is, she should use the old line " I will do ANYTHING for this job, and I DO mean ANYTHING "
That should do it.

[imprisoncheney]

zonk --

Your sexxual dysfunctions are showing, girl.

[zonkzilla]

I don't know about the rest of you but I would NEVER beg and plead for any job on national TV for the world to see like all the political nominees do. I think maybe she should get on her knees, fold her hands, bow her head, cry, and beg for the job.
What a joke. A circus with a bunch of clowns.

[ffoulkes-2009]

She wants the job for the power she will hold in her hands. The same as most politicians.

[zonkzilla]

What a joke.
The democrats are getting camera time sucking up to her and the republicans are getting face time trashing her.
Both parties are only doing this to get votes and impress their base and get their ugly faces on the news.
A truly pathetic low class carnival act and waste of our tax money.

[pubsnomore]

Since she has the confirmation in the bag, why doesn't she just answer all of the RePigSwine questions with "I don't know"?

[South-of-Heaven]

and the Verbal Lynching by southern fascists continues today.
Brought to you by the 3 letters K and the number 6.

[zeitmin77]

These hearings are a constitutional farce.How could anybody be frank,honest,and candid at such a hearing when his or her much sought after job is at stake?The statements made are no better than the campaign declarations of Barack Obama,for example.This is one of the greatest drawbacks of the American democracy.

[imprisoncheney]

Fascist troll.

[ffoulkes-2009]

Actually two Fascist trolls who responded to the comment.