Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Will Obama's Pick of Sotomayor Split the Right?

By David Corn, MotherJones.com. Posted May 26, 2009.


With his new Supreme Court nominee, Obama gives GOPers a choice: Tick off social conservatives or alienate Hispanic voters.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Who's Paying for the Recession Most of All? Young Workers
Lizzy Ratner

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Women's Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
10 Suicides a Month at Ft. Hood -- War Stress Is Taking Soldiers to the Brink
Dahr Jamail

More stories by David Corn

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

With President Barack Obama's nomination of federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, conservatives could have a blistering fight on their hands--among themselves.

As news leaked of the Sotomayor appointment, the Judicial Confirmation Network, a conservative outfit, released a statement from its counsel, Wendy E. Long, blasting Sotomayor:

Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written.  She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench.

She reads racial preferences and quotas into the Constitution, even to the point of dishonoring those who preserve our public safety....

She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court.

Long is a former law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and her group is run by a fellow named Gary Marx, who worked for the Bush-Cheney reelection campaign in 2004 and who was also a fundraiser for a social conservative group affiliated with religious right leader James Dobson. The Judicial Confirmation Network's quick opposition to Sotomayor--it aired ads against her before she was even picked by Obama--is an indication that the the Christian right is preparing for battle. As soon as Obama publicly named Sotomayor, two fundamentalist leaders and militant antiabortion crusaders--Rev. Patrick Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition and Rev. Rob Schenck of Faith and Action--held a prayer service in front of the Supreme Court to oppose the appointment. Concerned Women for America, a mainstay of the fundamentalist right, derided Sotomayor's "immodest bias," criticizing her for having remarked that a "'Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

But will the social conservatives eager for a fight over Sotomayor be supported by others on the right, as they try to block the appointment of the first Latina Supreme Court justice, whose life story (from housing project to Supreme Court!) is full of triumph-over-adversity inspiration?

Not everyone on the right appears eager for a war over Sotomayor. On May 1, conservative pundit and strategist Bill Kristol gave a talk to the DC lawyers' chapter of the Federalist Society, the preeminent conservative legal group. (Members include Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito Jr.) He said that Sotomayor would be hard to oppose, noting her Hispanic background and pointing out that she was first appointed to the federal bench by President George H.W. Bush. Kristol called her an attractive candidate and predicted she would sail through the confirmation process, with minimal Republican resistance. He did not believe Sotomayor would galvanize a meaningful opposition and did not encourage a full-scale campaign against her.

His remarks seemed in sync with the sentiment of the crowd in the room. The conservative lawyers at the event appeared more concerned about the ideological balance of the court and realized that any Obama pick would likely be a liberal-minded jurist replacing liberal-minded Justice David Souter. One prominent Federalist Society official said that he doubted that any fight over Sotomayor (or any other candidate then on Obama's short list) would galvanize conservatives.


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

See more stories tagged with: gop, senate, obama, supreme court, sotomayor

David Corn is the Washington bureau chief of Mother Jones and the co-author of Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War and is the author of The Lies of George W. Bush. He writes a blog at davidcorn.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! 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:
IDEOLOGICAL BALANCE?
Posted by: VZEQICVA on May 26, 2009 11:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The structure of the Supreme Court is not based on 'pipe dreams', or anyone's idea of the way it 'ought to be'. The irate Right has to get a grip and find something else to get pissed off about. This is about trying to rescue the Constitution from the people who believe that it interferes with their personal "ideology". It's not about YOU. It's about US. Thank you. Anna

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

Classic Comment of the Year
Posted by: Jdog on May 26, 2009 11:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court."

Hilarious.

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

Good!
Posted by: theblackgeorgecarlin on May 26, 2009 11:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let the republicans kill themselves in meaningless civil war, they deserve it. They are no longer relevant.

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

Race is irrelevant
Posted by: LibertyTiger on May 26, 2009 1:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The race of Obama's nominee is irrelevant to her qualifications to the job. To suggest otherwise is racism. As a Hispanic I take personal offense to someone who would say that I would support someone for SCOTUS based on their skin color or ethnic background. Can we move past race and evaluate a nominee based on his or her qualifications for the job?

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

An Expected Response from the Hard Right
Posted by: Tim Brown on May 26, 2009 1:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was not surprised by the quick, harsh response from the core of the hard-right. They have had much success over the past two decades with a harsh bark. It serves at least two purposes for them.

First, it has been known to put jelly into the spines of politicians of both liberal and conservative bent. Democrats who fear a challenge at the polls by rabid grassroots activists and the huge outpouring of conservative money have been loathe to "pick a fight" over something that their constituents may not remember at election time; Republicans, even more nervous about being perceived as not ideologically pure, will weigh their chances of avoiding a fight with the White House against defying what is left of their true party leaders and will decide, according to their electoral comfort, whether or not kowtowing is in order.

The second is purely intra-party positioning. Right now the GOP is in disarray having lost the last two major elections. What better time to calculate your odds and take a prudent stand – one that encompasses the largest amount of potential voters and donors? So, Huckabee and McConnell will pontificate, Limbaugh and Hannity will rail and the GOP will have at each other until the new Republican leadership emerges from the rubble.

My guess is that after some made-for-political-ads grand-standing the Republicans will capitulate to Obama’s preference – no doubt with a “we did our best to stop the liberals” spin – and then plan to use this appointment as “proof” of the liberal leaning of the current leadership. The political coffers will overflow and both parties will be happy with the outcome.

[« 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