Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

Republicans Will Be Grilled in Sotomayor's Hearings, Not the Other Way 'Round

By Roberto Lovato, Huffington Post. Posted May 28, 2009.


Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation process will be a chance to see if the GOP is ready say sorry for its wrongdoings perpetrated in the Bush era.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

As she faces what is already expected to be a host of hostile questions from the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in her confirmation hearings, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's first nominee to the Supreme Court, should remember one thing: that it is not she who will be on trial, but the Republican Party.

Rather than allow herself to be put at the center of another racism and sexism-laden political circus around the qualifications of a candidate who brings more real-life prosecutorial and actual judicial experience than any other Supreme Court nominee in the last 100 years, Sotomayor should consider another strategy. She -- and we -- should instead view those hearings as nothing less than a trial to determine whether the GOP is ready to make restitution for its role in a number of judicial and political wrongdoings perpetrated in the Bush era. Those wrongdoings include unleashing unprecedented and dangerous political attacks on Latinos, and breaching the political and electoral contract the "new GOP" said it wanted with Latinos, one of the country's most important voting blocs.

The Sotomayor hearings will determine whether members of the Republican Party are ready to renew fundamental principles of justice and the rule of law.

Consider the case of U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. Cornyn supported the nomination of the last Latino to be considered for a high office dealing with matters of justice -- disgraced former Attorney General and Republican Alberto Gonzales. Even after Gonzales's role in crafting the now infamous "torture memos" became apparent, Cornyn raised none of the "red flags" and "lots of questions" he now says he has about Sotomayor.

During the Senate Judiciary hearings around the Gonzales nomination, Cornyn declared that the candidate would be vindicated by history:

The growing consensus behind the president's decision that al Qaeda terrorists are morally entitled to humane treatment but not legally entitled to the special privileges afforded to prisoners of war under the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 provides compelling vindication to supporters of Judge Alberto R. Gonzales' nomination to be our nation's 80th attorney general.

Even when Atty. Gen. Gonzales came under fire for his role in the firings of a group of United States attorneys in late 2006, Cornyn and other Republicans on the Senate Judiciary defended Gonzales as an "honorable and decent man" who "finds himself in a bad situation."

Though Gonzales will likely turn into the invisible brown GOP man, or go on a long vacation during the Sotomayor confirmation, millions of Latinos will watch what for them is a historical event of the utmost political and intimate importance. Many of these Latinos will be watching to see any signs of the racism and xenophobia many Latinos blame the GOP for and voted overwhelmingly against in the last election. Latino voters will, for example, be vigilant about what GOP Senate Judiciary members like Jeff Sessions say before and during the hearings.

Earlier this month, reports linking Sessions, the ranking Republican
on the committee, to anti-immigrant groups filled Spanish-language
media. According to the Washington-based America's Voice, the Alabama
senator has appeared at several events organized by the Center for
Immigration Studies (CIS), NumbersUSA, as well as the Federation for
American Immigration Reform, which was designated by the Southern
Poverty Law Center and other organizations as a "hate group."

Anything in this must-see Latino political event resembling the anti-immigrant rhetoric that has been Sessions' trademark will cost his party for years to come. Such concerns about GOP leaders among Latinos, who are only beginning to realize their enormous political potential, pose a gigantic dilemma to a Republican Party that must make inroads among Latino voters if it is to have a political future.

Whatever they say in the hearings, Republicans will be at a great disadvantage when it comes time to counting votes in a Democrat-controlled Senate that will be at, or very close to, the filibuster-proof 60-vote majority needed to confirm Sotomayor.

So it will be the GOP and not Sotomayor that will be on trial in this high-stakes judicial confirmation of the post-Bush era of Republican dominance. Latinos will watch to see if GOP leaders will use the Sotomayor hearings to distance themselves from Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and others many Latinos consider to be anti-immigrant extremists.

And we should all be watching to see if Republicans are prepared to use the Sotomayor confirmation as a way to communicate a willingness to redeem themselves for the great injustices of our recent past.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: supreme court, latino vote, politics news, sotomayor, sonia sotomayor, jeff sessions and latinos, obama and sotomayor, obama and the supreme cou, race and politics, race and the supreme cour, republicans and immigrati, republicans-and-latino-vo, sexism and the supreme co, sonia sotomayor supreme c, us supreme court

Roberto Lovato, a frequent Nation contributor, is a New York-based writer with New America Media.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Oh, but haven't you heard?...
Posted by: FrEdMaSt on May 28, 2009 1:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...being a republican means never having to say you're sorry -- because you believe you never do anything wrong (see Bush, George W.; Cheney, Richard).

- Frank

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're Absolutely Right Posted by: Aimleft
» Why bother? Posted by: EinMD
Confirmation is not about the Senators
Posted by: johnwinthrop on May 28, 2009 1:41 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's about the candidate. "Experience" per se is irrelevant. We could put a bunch of Afghan, Chinese and Haitian refugees on the bench if suffering and growing up poor counted. Which it doesn't. The question is, can she read in the judicial sense. What do judges mean when they apply the law and do they apply it correctly. Does she understand courts have no jurisdiction in some cases? Does she know that courts defer to legistures and even to popular custom in most cases? Does she understand that proprety rights are the most important rights under our Constitution and if you don't like it, amend the constitution, don't hire a judge to rule your way. Finally, does she get that most people could care less that she's from Puerto Rico nor do they think she gets extra suceess points for that accident of birth?

BTW, what did she do of distinction when she was in private practice. It's a lot tougher being counsel for a private company or person than to be a judge or prosecutor with all of the resources of an oppressive govt behind you. Did she succeed? Flop? What did she do when she had to think on her feet without a bunch of Harvard law clerks behind her? Any creative law theories? Think Sonia think? You are up for confirmation of your alleged competence, not Senator Sessions. Don't worry about immigration dodger expert Lovato thinks; worry about what you think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jerry Lee Mayeux
Posted by: CTC123 on May 28, 2009 2:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Consider the Connection to:
Moving in a Positive Direction
Please Google or AIM Search:
Judge Sonia Sotomayor:
Sotomayor on the Environment:
CTC123GREEN

Great article, Robert Lovato

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Should have skipped the "Pussy Galore" attack
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 28, 2009 5:33 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hell they don't have to just protect themselves from appearing Racist (which will be difficult- since they are), butneed to be VERY careful not to piss off the Female Electorate any Further.
Oh we Got their "Pussy Galore" Reference in their feeble attempt to deflect prosecutorial blame away from themselves. Heres where you Repugs have once again Fucked Up.If Waterborading in Not Torture- Then Pelosi Did nothing Wrong. However if Waterborading is Torture (which you are admitting by implicating Pelosi) then those Repugs who were the Majority leaders and privvy to these CIA Briefs are just as Guilty of approving War Crimes.
Repugs have once again underestimated and miscalcuated the Dem Base- We don't give a shit if we take Pelosi down with YOU. She took Impeachment off the Table.so if it takes Prosecuting Pelosi for Complicity after the fact to get the Bushies, and a Good number of Repugs, Convicted for Conspiracy to committ War crimes and Treason- So Be it.
The Repugs Ploy is a ridiculous as the 'Hostage' scene in Blazing Saddles.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't hold your breath
Posted by: Outspokengrandmother on May 28, 2009 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Republicans say they're sorry? Republicans would rather lose the Latino and the youth and every other vote that isn't in their immediate constiuency than admit they were wrong about anything. The group that brought us the present economy, two wars that we're losing, and the demolition of the constitution. This is the group that can't shoot straight. I expect nothing but the worst from that group at the Sotomayor hearing and every other hearing of import.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lost in all this....
Posted by: muzunguhowru on May 28, 2009 10:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is the fact that Judge Sotamayor is not particularly liberal (or "Progressive" for those that like the cop out word better) She has a history of being easily swayed by strong right wing judges she has worked with. In particular, her positions on Abortion rights and Gay marriage need to be fully vetted. BHO has already shown his homophobic tendencies by throwing gays under the bus and he is clearly inclined to accommodate the anti abortion crowd as well if only for short term political advantage. We should not blithely assume that because she is a women or a Latina or some other emotionally appealing feature that she s a good pick. Like wise the "empathy" thing is a red herring and means little or nothing.The current SCOTUS is skewed to the right as it is. A real liberal should be chosen and she should have her feet held to the fire on her beliefs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lost in all this.... Posted by: adp3d
The Past Helps Us See The Present.
Posted by: melpol on May 28, 2009 10:41 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It would not be surprising if a judge who is gay would punish a gay basher more severely. That judge would understand the pain of the victim. It also would not be surprising if a latina judge who was brought up in the South Bronx would hate racists more profoundly. Those that have experienced abuse cannot be expected to be impartial against abusers. It is wrong to expect Sotomayor to forget her experience in the South Bronx projects. If she did it would not be called psychological growth but insensitivity. Her past is an asset and it will add understanding and wisdom to the court.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, to see them fall!
Posted by: willymack on May 28, 2009 10:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The rethugs have a major comeuppance coming to them. Maybe they'll expose themselves in the heat of the moment at the Sotomayor hearings. Maybe our people will remember this in 2010. I can dream, can't I?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The one question I really want to have answered
Posted by: westomoon on May 28, 2009 1:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... is "in what way is Sonia Sotomayor inferior to Clarence Thomas?"

For some reason, I am driven especially crazy by the attacks on her intellect -- from the same bible-thumping, mush-mouthed creationist rednecks who insisted that any qualms about the dim-witted, unqualified, and morally-retarded Thomas were "a high-tech lynching".

There's a weird symmetry too, to the claims that Sotomayor is a racist -- very reminiscent of the Clinton campaign's claims that Obama was a racist. As far as I can tell, if you do not loathe the minority you belong to (like Justice Thomas does), that makes you a racist -- but I admit, I don't quite get this one.

Still, Hillary Clinton's odd aspersions on Obama's intellect, and Geraldine Ferraro's bizarre claims that only affirmative action could have put Obama into contention for the presidency, followed by her demand that he apologize to her for his "racism", are weirdly similar to the neocons' "kitchen sink" slurs on Sotomayor.

I would also love to have a flaming liberal on the Supreme Court, but let's face it -- Rethugs appoint ideologues, and Democrats appoint moderate, sound jurists. Since we do need some decent jurisprudence at the top of the third branch of government, I am resigned to the fact that any staunch liberals on the Court will have to be grown in place, not put there. Fortunately, that seems to happen quite often -- Earl Warren is the most classic example.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't want grilled Republicans at my barbecue
Posted by: hagwind on May 28, 2009 6:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . but I do hope that these confirmation hearings give some evidence that Senate Democrats have developed some chutzpah. Too many of them have been lying on their backs with their paws in the air for an awful long time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tired of it!
Posted by: LoveAlex59 on May 28, 2009 9:14 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I for one am sick and tired of constantly hearing the feminists and the media referring to the days when the Court was made of solely of white males in a derogatory fashion! Those "old white men" were responsible for some of the great decisions handed down throughout history (decisions the liberals often applaud to this day!)! Brown v Board of Education, the Miranda Rights, Civil Rights laws of the 1960's, etc were results of decisions made by those "old white men"! And there were no women on the Court when the decision came down in Roe v Wade! Now think of all the great decisions the Court has handed down since women were added--- there are none! They really haven't added much to the history of this nation have they! I honor the many "old white men" who served with honor and distinction on the Supreme Court over the course of our nation's history! To the media: Stop Bashing Them!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama's Head Fake
Posted by: lorenzodimedici1 on May 30, 2009 6:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He is a brilliant strategist. He will serve up bold initiatives to force public discourse about uncomfortable issues. Of course, there oould be some trouble prior to enactment or enshrinement.

The Sotomayor nomination is a case in point. That is one of a series of repudiations of the failed Bush regime policies. Bush was so far off in so many areas besides Iraq - see his pharmaceutical benefit fiasco among others as an example of how to push a lie while daring the other side to try to combat it. He actually got through business cases that ignored long term results, since that planning horizon was after his term ended.

Too bad that the ground rules for any public discourse are biased. The PC brigade will shout down anyone that dares to deviate from their party line. They will hurl nonsensical allegations to deflect attention from underlying issues. The un-PC brigade has its own version of that, too.

In the end, there will be a lot of talking heads and hot air, signifying nothing, and Sotomayor will be approved.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement