With Sotomayor comes new era in judicial politics
WASHINGTON -- As a national television audience tunes in this week to the Senate hearings for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, it will get a crash course in the law beginning with the perennial three R's: race, religion and Roe.
For U.S. appeals court Judge Sotomayor, there will also be Ricci, as in Ricci v. DeStefano, the case in which she voted to uphold New Haven, Conn., officials' cancellation of the results of a firefighter promotion test because whites outscored blacks and Hispanics.
That case, along with the enduringly controversial Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal nationwide in 1973, will be among those cited repeatedly by senators trying to discern what kind of justice Sotomayor would be.
The hearings that begin at 10 a.m. ET Monday will focus on a woman who grew up in a Bronx, N.Y., housing project and climbed to the top rungs of the U.S. judiciary — and who now represents the first high-court nomination by a Democratic president in 15 years, a period in which Republican appointees made the bench more conservative.
Sotomayor, President Obama's first pick for a lifetime appointment to the court, essentially represents the start of a new era of judicial confirmations.
Senators in both parties will use her hearings not just to make points about their views of the law, but also to establish the tone for any future nominations by Obama.
Sotomayor, whose voting record probably will be similar to newly retired liberal justice David Souter, is not likely to change the conservative tilt on the Supreme Court. But, with more retirements likely in coming years, Obama eventually may be able to tip the ideological balance of the bench.
As a result, the Q & A that plays out before audiences tuned in via TV, radio and online video will give senators a chance to convey their priorities for this opening and others to come. The sessions will signal how Democrats, now holding a strong Senate majority, and Republicans, playing defense, expect to use their positions of influence.
Nomination hearings also can reflect those of the past, and some of the partisanship from the last two Supreme Court nominees — conservatives appointed by George W. Bush— is in the air. Samuel Alito was approved in 2006 by a 58-42 vote; 40 of the opponents were Democrats. Chief Justice John Roberts won a 78-22 vote in 2005; all 22 "nays" came from Democrats.
The hearings also will provide the first, and maybe last, chance to see the nominee on a national stage before she would retreat to the cloister of the high court, where justices speak largely through their written opinions. In an era of predictable questions and scripted answers, however, Sotomayor may not reveal much about how she would rule.
"There is certainly a highly ritualistic quality to confirmation hearings," says University of Texas law professor Sanford Levinson. "The wise nominee will decline to say anything interesting about any such issues on the grounds that they might come before her as a justice."
