Leahy on Sotomayor: "She Will be Confirmed"

by: odum

Thu Jun 25, 2009 at 23:13:55 PM EDT

The first phase of the Republican effort to scuttle Sotomayor's nomination has, in a sense, collapsed in on its own weight. Jump started by the much-maligned hit piece from Jeffrey Rosen that played crudely to gender stereotypes without any meaningful corroboration, the Republican media hit machine (in particular Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh) turned the dial up to 11 almost instantly in an outrageous display of sleaze and name-calling. They went so over the top so quickly, that the whole effort seemed to stumble among Republicans in the Senate as well as the public at large.

But earlier this week on the Senate floor, phase 2 began. Led by new Senate Judiciary ranking member Jeff Sessions of Alabama (who himself was rejected for a federal judgeship by the Senate back in 1986  for being, as Senator Kennedy described him at the time, "a throwback to a shameful era which I know both black and white Americans thought was in our past" for his characterizations of groups such as the NAACP as un-American), this new round of attacks seems to be attacking on more fronts than the crude race-baiting and gender stereotyping that characterized phase 1, yet still seems on the edge of falling right back into those same, ugly memes.

Senate Democrats, led by Vermont Senator and Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, have wasted no time in pushing back. For his part, Leahy seems to relish the opportunity. He is clearly in his element in such a debate, but one has to wonder if the timing is especially opportune. After all, Leahy was a leading voice against the extra-judicial excesses of the Bush administration for years - and has advocated for a process through which some of those excesses might be brought to light. Although he is clearly a big supporter of our new President, it must be frustrating to see the new administration unexpectedly eager to continue many of those policies on the one hand, and uninterested (if not outright opposed) to any kind of truth and reconciliation process targeting the previous regime. Given all this, might a Supreme Court nomination that he can really take the lead on in the Senate be just what the doctor ordered?

Whatever the case, Vermont's senior Senator directly addressed the attacks on Sotomayor's character and stated unequivocally that she will come through the process and reach the Court. The text of his comments after the flip

Leahy: "They had fundraising letters going out even before she was nominated. You had immediately Rush Limbaugh, on television, saying she was the equivalent of the head of the Ku Klux Klan. And Newt Gingrich... saying that she was biased and bigoted and so on, or words to that effect... I think a lot of the Republican Senators I've talked with are embarrassed by this and want nothing to do with it. She's going to be confrmed. I expect she'll be confirmed by a comfortable margin.

I remember when they made the same attacks about Eric Holder. They had Karl Rove going on television and he basically ordered the Republicans - they had to stop Eric Holder. By the time I finished the hearings on Holder and the debate on the floor, I was able to convince enough Senators so he got a much bigger vote than any of the last four Attorneys General - for the person they were going to stop.

I suspect that Judge Sotomayor will get a very substantial vote.

But the reason I'm also doing her hearing July instead of September as they requested, is that as long as they want to keep attacking her, she can't respond to these attacks except in the hearing. So we'll let them come before the hearing and get a response. We've had - I like her because she was in law enforcement. I've talked with other Senators who have been prosecutors as I have, and there's very strong feeling positive by a lot of them.

I look at today when a number of law enforcement groups endorsed her. Of course, (Manhattan district attorney) Bob Morgenthau strongly endorsed her, and talked to law enforcement and others who were with her when she was a prosecotor and said she was extraordinarily well prepared and very tough.

So we'll see how the hearings go, of course a lot will depend on those, but I'll start the hearings the week after we come back from the 4th of July. I did hear from a couple senators they're going to be cramped for time to prepare - well, do as I'm doing, I'm giving up my 4th of July vacation, I'm willing to spend the whole weekend in Vermont preparing for this.

They didnt think that a weekend spent in Vermont was quite the punishement they'd like to give me."

odum: "It seems clear that Senator Jeff Sessions is going to be a very, very different ranking member than Sen. Specter, with whom you seemed to put a lot of effort into having a good working relationship. He has a different approach to politics, he's been described as an ideologue by critics. You've worked with hard-right counterparts in the past - such as Orrin Hatch - but Sessions would seem to present unique challenges that might take you out of your preferred modus operandi..."

Leahy: "...I've had periods of being chairman and ranking member as Specter has. Of course Specter and I first knew each other when we wer both prosecutors. I was State's Attorney in Chittenden County, he was District Attorney in Philadelphia, so we've known each other for years. He's a cancer survivor, my wife's a cancer survivor, they've talked about this, they've had long talks about cancer treatment. One year he was given a cancer group's hero award, she presented it - next year she was given it and he presented it, so we have that kind of personal relationship.

But I've talked to Senator Sessions. I've tried to work closely with him. I've always kept my word to him - been fair to him. I told him this is a chance where he'll get more national attention than he's done and he'll have to make up his own mind.

Now obviously I cant tell him what to do, but I have told everyone that I'm not going to set different rules for her than we had for (Chief Justice) John Roberts, and I'm not going to sit and let her be a punching bag for week after week after week without being able to respond.

And we'll go by the hearing, and ultimately we'll vote for her or against her, and every Senator can make up their own mind. A Supreme Court nominee... often is there long after the President and the Senators are involved.

You have to decide - there's only 101 people in this country who really have a say in this Supreme Court Justice. Now, there's 300 million Americans - and 101 people get involved. First and foremost the President nominates her, and 100 senators who can either vote for or vote against her. That's a pretty awesome responsibility. And I think its a  responsibility that should be borne in real debate and real consideration (rather) than in cheap shot fundraising letters.

And I think that's the way the American People look at it because she scores very high in the public opinion polls and the Republicans who are attacking her score very poorly. Ii think they should forget about the fundraisers.

I have voted on every member of the US Supreme Court. And I've been here for all the hearings, not only for the ones who are there, but some of the ones who are no longer there like Justice O'Connor and Chief Justice Rehnquist. I voted on his nomination as Chief Justice, not as Justice, but - I have a rule that I will not meet the special interest groups of the right or the left when it comes to a Supreme Court nominee. I remember some of the groups on the left picketing in front of my office because I was going to support David Souter. They said we can't have a right winger like him. Well, the same groups would love to have him stay (laughs). So I have to make up my own mind. And I will. And I only half-joke about being up in Vermont and working on the break. Our house is really kind of a nice quiet place to work. I dont have the phones ringing, I don't have distractions, I can be in my chinos and a t-shirt..."

odum: "Sounds like blogging."

Leahy: "Yeah- cup of coffee and my pajamas."

odum: "It seems like there's a real potential here for hearings to become a real watershed event on race and gender in America. With Sessions his history with racial issues on the one hand, it just seems like both Sotomayor and Sessions have the potential to become almost archetypal figures of the past vs. a more multicultural future, which could make these hearings into a real cultural arena. Do you think there's the potential for the hearings to play out that way?"

Leahy: You may have - I think its possible Senator Sessions will surprise people.

We need to make sure that every Senator has a chance to ask the questions they want. But in the end, I will have a vote in committee, and in the end I will have a vote on the Senate floor and once we have those votes, she will be confirmed.

And I'll ask each current Senator - keep in mind, keep in mind what you're saying about the federal judiciary and ask your questions - but keep in mind, do you want to do anything to damage the federal judiciary?

I always remember the time after the breakup of the Soviet Union- a group was charged with setting up their new judicial system. And one of them said to me 'is it true that in the United States people sometimes sue the government?' and I said that's true. 'Is it also true that sometimes they win?' I said that's also true. 'Do you then replace the judge? And when I explained, you could see a light bulb go on.

Well, we're going to give people a chance to see - this is going to be a fair, its going to be a complete hearing. And it will wrap it up.