The US Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearings on the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court served to elevate the Judge’s public impression and to point out the silliness of Republicans on the committee.
Frank Rich’s outstanding editorial in Saturday’s New York Times eloquently points out the hypocrisy of many of the Republican Senators’ comments when compared with their actions.
US Senator Lindsey Graham is a hard-working accomplished American. He served as a judge advocate in the Air Force for six years and is the only U.S. Senator serving in the Reserves. However, his bitter-single-old-white-man comments during the Sotomayor hearings fell flat among Americans:
“…this wise Latino [sic] comment has been talked about a lot. But I can just tell you one thing: If I had said anything remotely like that, my career would have been over. That’s true of most people here.”
Senator Graham: yes of course, and justifiably so. Your ethnic, racial, nor gender group do not have a history of underrepresentation in the US courts, government, business, highest-income levels, or just about anything else.
For the sake of argument, let’s accept Senator Graham’s challenge and re-phrase Judge Sotomayor’s statement as if he had said it:
“I would hope that a wise Anglo-Saxon man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn’t lived that life.”
Clearly, this does not make sense as there would be no need to “hope.” The US Supreme Court has been dominated by Anglo-Saxon men since its inception. Most of them have done a good job, but there would be nothing to “hope” for as we have already seen their results. Moreover, the lives of Anglo-Saxon men are widely communicated in our society. They get the most media coverage and most of the famous people in the US are Anglo-Saxon men. Unlike Latinas, there is no shortage of publicity, media coverage, or attention given to their accomplishments, lifestyles, needs or concerns. Judge Sotomayor’s statement was not discriminatory in any manner, she merely pointed out that she has a perspective never yet represented on the Court.
In her same speech, Judge Sotomayor points out, “Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society.” In other words, it is hard to provide justice without a Supreme Court that has had similar experiences to the people it serves.
Sen. Graham goes on to point out the few, limited, critical remarks of Sotomayor given anonymously by lawyers that have appeared in her court, chiding her that “maybe these hearings are time for self-reflection.” Not realizing how accurately this comment applies to himself.
Frank Rich also talks about Tom Coburn, US Senator from Oklahoma, who has been providing counsel to Senator John Ensign of Nevada. Yes, you know why John Ensign sounds familiar. According to Fox News, “Ensign’s mistress’ husband…said that Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and others originally had urged Ensign to pay [her family] ‘millions.’” Now the case may go to the FBI.
But back to the hearings…. Tom Coburn, advisor to the adulterer, lectured Sotomayor. Funny how he doesn’t address Sen. Ensign this way. According to Rich, he finds Sotomayor’s views “extremely troubling.” “There’s nothing in Sotomayor’s history remotely as troubling as Coburn’s role in the Ensign scandal,” says NYT’s Rich. And the GOP wonders why it is losing female and Latino voters. I’ll bet the RNC winced at that exchange.
Interestingly, Ensign and Coburn are both part of the lynch mob that resulted in millions of dollars of taxpayer money to be spent on President Clinton’s impeachment. An impeachment that was brought about by actions similiar to those of Sen. Ensign.
