US News

Obama's Supreme Court nominee meets lawmakers (Roundup)

Jun 2, 2009, 20:37 GMT

Washington - Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's pick to join the highest court in the United States, met leading US senators Tuesday who will help decide whether she is approved as the first-ever Hispanic judge on the Supreme Court. Sotomayor met the top Democrats and Republicans in the chamber as well as leading members of the Senate's Judiciary Committee. She is expected to face a nomination hearing in July. Sotomayor, who was born to Puerto Rican parents but grew up in New York's South Bronx, is considered a moderate left-leaning judge and is widely expected to get the Democratic-controlled Senate's approval. Regarded as one of the most important, long-lasting decisions made by a US president, Obama nominated Sotomayor to the court last week to replace Justice David Souter, who is also viewed as a left-leaning judge and is set to retire in June. Democrats are pushing for Sotomayor's confirmation nomination before the Senate goes into a month-long recess in August, but some Republicans have suggested they will delay her nomination. Republicans have focussed attention on a 2001 comment by Sotomayor that 'wise Latina' judges could reach better decisions than white male judges because of their more diverse life experiences. Conservatives have argued those sentiments suggest she puts 'identity politics' above judicial fairness, while some have gone as far as to call the comment 'racist.' 'The attacks made against her are among the most vicious I've ever seen,' Senator Patrick Leahy, the Democratic chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said after meeting Sotomayor. Leahy said she had 'impeccable credentials.' Jeff Sessions, the leading Republican on the committee, pledged a 'fair hearing' after his own meeting with Sotomayor. But Sessions said he would press Sotomayor on the idea that justices should rule 'without regard to personal prejudices or ideas or political convictions.' Supreme Court nominations have become among the most partisan and divisive debates held in the United States, with lobby groups on both sides spending millions to support or derail potential nominees. The nine-member court itself is sharply divided, with four justices viewed as conservative and four considered liberal, including Souter. Justice Anthony Kennedy is often labelled the 'swing vote' on the court.

On the Web

Blowing Up Blogs

Place your ad here
Loading...

Your Talkback on this Story

Latest Headlines in US

Older Talkback

page: 1

SP4:'your honor?'Jun 3rd, 2009 - 03:04:14

her honor:'yes senator?'

senator:'try explaining your recent decision to back the dumping of a firemans safety test'

her honor:'well sir...a black man wasn't going to pass, so the sons-a-bitches threw everyone's test out'

senator:'well, doesn't that strike you as just a little more than discriminating?'

her honor:'oh no senator....after all, they threw everyone's out!'

senator:'and why does this not meet the standard of discrimination?'

her honor:'well senator...they f--ked everyone equally!'

Change you can(not f--king) believe in!

Report this comment

what's the matter, SP,Jun 3rd, 2009 - 04:42:02

the family dog getting to rough with you, or no longer satisfying? You really should direct your anger at the cause, you and your interactions with your real dad. This transference thing of yours could be helped, if you had your head shrunk by a professional, instead of drugs and dogs.

Report this comment

hey idiots stick...Jun 3rd, 2009 - 05:29:08

'her honor:'well sir...a black man wasn't going to pass, so the sons-a-bitches threw everyone's test out'
senator:'well, doesn't that strike you as just a little more than discriminating?'
her honor:'oh no senator....after all, they threw everyone's out!'
senator:'and why does this not meet the standard of discrimination?'
her honor:'well senator...they f--ked everyone equally!'
Change you can(not f--king) believe in!'

Again just more lies and babble by the idiots stick of the board. Do you actually cry when you say these things, stomp your feet, throw a fit?

The change in this case is the nomination of someone who has more experience that all of the Bush nominees put together---actually more court cases, more decisions. Change is in the nomination of someone who was not forced on you by the neo-con bible thumpers. Change like it or not you big loser, has occurred. Nothing AT ALL you can do for a couple of years. You lost and you continue to loose---she will be approved by at least 65 Senators and will be the next member of the Supreme Court! Isn't America great?

Report this comment

Did she do anything elseJun 3rd, 2009 - 07:27:11

than apply the laws when she eventually made that decision,SP4,did she ?
It seems there are always two sets of rules for you to apply;those that apply to your own breed and those that apply to others .
Thanks for demonstrating once more what a bunch of hypocrisy the GOP is defending here ....as usual.

Report this comment

SP4: Hey Kids (and monkey boys)Jun 3rd, 2009 - 14:35:24

...it was her decision, end of story.

...she can take credit for it.

That test was thrown out for no other reason than the correct color person did not pass, and she backed this play in her court. This is the kind of jurist Obama wants making decisions on laws in America. If that's the Obama standard of equality, what does the American government offer, anymore, to us as a reason to continue in it's current form?

Report this comment

@sp4Jun 3rd, 2009 - 15:04:18

No it was NOT her decision,it was the law,the very thing you accuse her of not upholding.Judges are supposed to rule by law ,remember ?

Report this comment

SP4: what law?...Jun 3rd, 2009 - 16:23:16

...you moron? What law says you must throw out a fair and equal test, where all of the participants have an equal chance, dooming the one's who succeeded so that the failures get a second change?

What Law??????

The testers wanted an outcome of their desires and sunk the achievers so as to facilitate an outcome to their liking. That said, they perpetrated a wrong. Those candidates had a reasonable expectation of being awarded a job upon completion, and it was stoloen from them.

What kind of society rewards failure? Who would want to live in it? What a commentary for a president who is feeding billions to theloser car company while their competitor holds their own in the troubled times.

God, you mindless libnazi automaton.

Report this comment

Really?Jun 4th, 2009 - 01:42:05

And what about the mindless little skit with your usual 'f' word, without which you aren't able to express yourself - Intelligence extraordinaire!!

Report this comment

The 'Really.'......Jun 4th, 2009 - 01:45:17

was directed at SP.

Report this comment

SP4: as usualJun 5th, 2009 - 20:25:49

...the libnazi retreat into insults. Talk about not being able to express yourself...

Report this comment

page: 1