Sotomayor Confirmation Hearing To Begin
July 13
WASHINGTON (Tuesday,
June 9, 2009) – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy
(D-Vt.) Tuesday announced that hearings to consider the nomination of
Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme
Court will begin on July 13.
In a statement on the Senate floor, Leahy said, “This is a schedule that
tracks the process the Senate followed by bipartisan agreement in
considering President Bush’s nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme
Court in 2005. That agreement was reached before the Committee
received the answers to the bipartisan questionnaire, and before the
Committee had received any of the 75,000 pages of documents from his
years working in Republican administrations. If 48 days were
sufficient to prepare for that hearing, in accordance with our agreement
and the initial schedule, it is certainly adequate time to prepare for
the confirmation hearing for Judge Sotomayor.”
Chief Justice John Roberts was confirmed 72 days after he was designated
to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Under a similar
timeline, Sotomayor’s nomination should be confirmed by August 6, before
the Senate recesses for August.
On May 26, President Obama announced his designation of Sotomayor to
succeed retiring Justice David Souter. On June 4, Sotomayor
returned the completed bipartisan Committee questionnaire.
Sotomayor served as an assistant district attorney in New York City and
in private practice before being confirmed to the federal district court
in 1992. In 1998, she was confirmed to the Second Circuit Court of
Appeals. Her public record has been subject to analysis since her
name emerged as one of the leading contenders to replace Justice Souter.
Despite her strong public record, Sotomayor has been the subject of
character attacks from conservative commentators and others.
“There is no reason to unduly delay consideration of this well-qualified
nominee,” Leahy said. “Indeed, given the attacks on her character,
there are compelling reasons to proceed even ahead of this schedule.
She deserves the earliest opportunity to respond to those attacks.”
Leahy continued, “In selecting this date I am trying to be fair to all
concerned. I want to be fair to the nominee and allow her the
earliest possible opportunity to respond to the attacks made about her
character. It is not fair for her critics to be calling her racist
without allowing her the opportunity to respond. I do not want to
see this historic nomination of Sonia Sotomayor treated unfairly or less
fairly than the Senate treated the nomination of John Roberts.”
In 2005, Senate Republicans threatened to hold confirmation hearings on
Roberts’ nomination just six weeks after he was designated to fill
retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s seat on the Supreme Court.
The hearing was instead scheduled to be held one week later, after
Senate Democrats agreed to waive the right to hold over for one week a
Committee vote on the nomination, to submit written questions for the
record within 24 hours of the conclusion of the hearing, and to allow a
Committee vote just 6 days after the conclusion of the hearings.
Leahy has scheduled the Sotomayor hearings to begin seven weeks after
her designation, but has not received similar assurances from Senate
Republicans.
Further details about the hearing, including information about how the
public and members of the press will be able to attend the proceedings,
will be released in the coming weeks.
Leahy’s full statement, as prepared, follows.
Confirmation Hearings: A Timeline That Is Fair To Senators, And
Fair To The Nominee
# # # # #
Statement Of Senator
Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.),
Chairman, Senate
Judiciary Committee,
Regarding The Nomination Of Judge Sonia Sotomayor
To Be An Associate Justice On The U.S. Supreme Court
June 9, 2009
As Prepared
Today, I am
announcing that the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold the
confirmation hearing on the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be an
Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court on July 13.
I have talked and met
with Senator Sessions, the Committee’s Ranking Member, several times to
discuss the scheduling of this hearing. I will continue to consult
with Senator Sessions to ensure that we hold a fair hearing. We were
able to work cooperatively to send a bipartisan questionnaire to Judge
Sotomayor within one day of her designation by President Obama.
Last week the Committee received her response to that questionnaire.
We also received other background information from the administration,
as well as the official presidential nomination.
This is a reasonable
schedule that is in line with past experience and that will allow
several more weeks for Committee members to prepare for the hearing.
There is no reason to unduly delay consideration of this well-qualified
nominee. Indeed, given the attacks on her character, there are
compelling reasons to proceed even ahead of this schedule. She
deserves the earliest opportunity to respond to those attacks.
This is a responsible
schedule that serves the many interests involved: the American people’s
stake in a process that is fair and thorough but not needlessly
prolonged; the Senate, which needs sufficient time to prepare for
confirmation hearings, and which has a full legislative plate of
additional pressing business in the weeks and months ahead that is of
great importance to our constituents and to the Nation; the Third Branch
of government, which depends on the other branches of government to fill
Court vacancies in our independent judiciary; the President, who has
nominated Judge Sotomayor; and the nominee herself, who, as a judge,
will not be able to defend herself from these attacks until hearings are
convened. The Justice who takes Justice Souter’s place for the
Court session that convenes Oct. 5 also will need as much time as
possible before then to hire clerks, set up an office and take part with
the rest of the Court in the preparatory work that precedes the formal
start of the session.
This is a schedule
that tracks the process the Senate followed by bipartisan agreement in
considering President Bush’s nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme
Court in 2005. At that time, I served as the Ranking Minority
Member of the Judiciary Committee. I met with our Republican
Chairman, and we worked out a schedule that provided for his hearing 48
days after he was named by President Bush. That agreement was
reached before the Committee received the answers to the bipartisan
questionnaire, and before the Committee had received any of the 75,000
pages of documents from his years working in Republican administrations.
And of course, that nomination was to replace Justice O’Connor, who was
recognized to be the pivotal vote on the Supreme Court. If 48 days
were sufficient to prepare for that hearing, in accordance with our
agreement and the initial schedule, it is certainly adequate time to
prepare for the confirmation hearing for Judge Sotomayor.
My initial proposal
to Senator Sessions was that we begin the hearing on July 7, following
the Senate’s return from the July 4 recess. I have deferred the
start date to July 13 in an effort to accommodate our Republican
members. With bipartisan cooperation, we should still be able to
complete Judiciary Committee consideration of the nomination during the
last week in July, and allow the Senate to consider the nomination
during the first week in August, before the Senate recesses on August 7.
In selecting this
date I am trying to be fair to all concerned. I want to be fair to
the nominee and allow her the earliest possible opportunity to respond
to the attacks made about her character. It is not fair for her
critics to be calling her racist without allowing her the opportunity to
respond.
I also want to
conclude the process without unnecessary delay so that she might
participate fully in the deliberations of the Supreme Court selecting
cases and preparing for its new term. In his May 1 letter to
President Obama, Justice Souter announced his resignation effective
“when the Supreme Court rises for the summer recess this year,” which
will happen later this month. Thereafter, the Supreme Court
prepares for the next term. To participate fully in the upcoming
deliberations, it would be helpful for his successor to be confirmed and
able to take part in the selection of cases as well in preparing for
their argument.
I am merely following
the timeline we followed with the Roberts nomination. The timeline
for the Alito nomination provides no reason to delay the hearing for
Judge Sotomayor. It presented a very different situation in many
ways. For one thing, that nomination was made with no consultation
by President Bush. By contrast, President Obama devoted several
weeks to consultation with both Republicans and Democrats before making
his selection. The Alito nomination was President Bush’s third
nomination to succeed Justice O’Connor. It followed four months of
intense effort by the Judiciary Committee, beginning with Justice
O’Connor’s announcement on July 1. And finally, the
Christmas holidays helped account for the timing of those hearings.
I do not believe Bastille Day requires us to delay the confirmation
hearings for the first Hispanic nominated to the Supreme Court for an
additional six weeks.
Some may recall that
Justice O’Connor’s resignation in 2005 was contingent on the “nomination
and confirmation of [her] successor.” She continued to serve on the
Supreme Court when its new term began in October 2005, and until Justice
Alito was confirmed at the end of January 2006. In addition, proceedings
to fill that vacancy involved a more extended process, not only because
Justice O’Connor represented a pivotal vote on the Supreme Court on so
many issues, but because President Bush first nominated John Roberts and
then withdrew that nomination, then nominated Harriet Miers and withdrew
her nomination when Republicans and conservatives revolted, and finally
nominated Samuel Alito. The nomination of Judge Alito was the
third Supreme Court nomination that the Senate was asked to consider,
and followed the withdrawal of the Miers nomination by only three days.
Given that sequence
of events, and the then upcoming Christmas holiday, that hearing on the
late October nomination of Samuel Alito was appropriately scheduled by
the Republican Chairman to begin after the New Year. In addition, Judge
Alito did not return his questionnaire until November 30. His
hearing was held 40 days after his questionnaire was returned, which
includes the Christmas and the holiday period. That is substantially
equivalent to the 39 days between the time receipt of Judge Sotomayor’s
questionnaire response and her hearing.
Of course, in the
case of the current nomination, Judge Sotomayor had been reported to be
a leading candidate for the vacancy as soon as it arose on May 1, and
her record was being studied from at least that time forward. The
right wing groups attacking her were doing so long before she was named
by the President on May 26, and those attacks have intensified since her
designation.
I do not want to see
this historic nomination of Sonia Sotomayor treated unfairly or less
fairly than the Senate treated the nomination of John Roberts. In 2005,
when President Bush made his first nomination to the Supreme Court,
Senator McConnell, then the Majority Whip, asserted that the Senate
should consider and confirm the nominations within 60 to 70 days.
We worked hard to achieve that.
The nomination of
Judge Sotomayor should more easily be considered within that timeframe.
Judge Sotomayor has been nominated to succeed Justice Souter, a
like-minded, independent and fair Justice, not bound by ideology, but
one who decided each case on its merits and in accordance with the rule
of law. We have the added benefit of her career being one that
includes her service on the judiciary for the past 17 years. Her
judicial decisions are matters of the public record. Indeed,
when my staff assembled her written opinions and offered them to the
Republican staff, they declined, because they already had them and were
reviewing them. We have the benefit of her judicial record being public
and well known to us. We have the benefit of her record having
been a subject of review for the last month, since at least May 1, when
she was mentioned as a leading candidate to succeed Justice Souter.
We have the benefit of having considered and confirmed her twice before,
first when nominated to be a judge by a Republican President and then
when elevated to the circuit court by a Democratic President. We
have the benefit of not having to search through presidential libraries
for work papers of the nominee. By contrast, the 75,000 pages of
work papers for John Roberts required extensive time and effort to
retrieve them from presidential libraries and to overcome claims of
privilege. In fact, they were still being received just days
before the hearing.
To delay Judge
Sotomayor’s hearing until September would double the amount of time that
Republicans and Democrats agreed was adequate to prepare for Judge
Roberts’ hearing. That would not be fair or appropriate. That would
not be equal treatment.
Unlike the late July
nomination of John Roberts, this nomination of Judge Sotomayor by
President Obama was announced in May. Unlike the resignation of
Justice O’Connor that was not announced until July, the retirement of
Justice Souter was made official on May 1. Given that the vacancy
arose two months earlier, and the nomination was made after bipartisan
consultation two months earlier, by following the Roberts roadmap, we
should be able to complete the process two months earlier. We should be
able to complete the entire process by the scheduled recess date of
August 7.
Of course, while the
Roberts nomination was pending, Chief Justice Rehnquist passed away and
President Bush decided to withdraw the initial nomination to be an
Associate Justice, and proceeded to nominate John Roberts to succeed the
Chief Justice, instead. We did not insist that the process start
over; rather, we continued to move forward. It was the aftermath
of Hurricane Katrina, with its destruction and toll in damage and human
life, that pushed the start of the hearings back one week, by bipartisan
agreement.
We were still able to
complete Senate consideration and the Senate confirmed John Roberts to
be the Chief Justice of the United States 72 days after he was initially
designated to be an Associate Justice. We did this despite the
fact that his initial nomination with withdrawn and he was renominated
to serve as the Chief Justice of the United States. We did this
despite the terrible aftermath of Hurricane Katrina that required a
week’s delay in beginning the Roberts confirmation hearing. Seventy-two
days after Judge Sotomayor was designated to the Supreme Court will be
August 6.
Her historic
nomination should be treated as fairly as the nomination of John Roberts
was treated by the Senate. Given the outrageous attacks on Judge
Sotomayor’s character, I do not think it fair to delay her hearing.
I cringed when I was that during the courtesy visit Judge Sotomayor paid
to Senator McConnell, reporters shouted questions about conservatives
calling her a racist. She had to sit there silently and could not
respond. She deserves that opportunity as soon as possible.
The hearing is also
the opportunity for all Senators on the Judiciary Committee, both
Republicans and Democrats, to ask questions, raise concerns and evaluate
the nomination. As Senator Sessions’ Saturday radio speech ably
demonstrates, Republican Senators are already prepared to ask their
questions. Last week, we were considering another judicial
nomination at the meeting of the Judiciary Committee when Senator Kyl
suggested that he may oppose all of President Obama’s nominees given
what he views as the criteria President Obama is considering in
selecting them. Republicans have questioned whether her
recognition that she brings her life experience with her, as all judges
do, is somehow disqualifying. Our Republican colleagues say that
they intend to ask her about her judicial philosophy. It does not
take four months to prepare to ask these questions. They have
already raised them. They will surely be prepared to ask them more
than a month from now. Her hearing on July 13 will, in effect,
afford 10 weeks for them to have prepared.
I hope that the
Republican Senators who are members of the Judiciary Committee will
cooperate. This is a schedule that I think is both fair and
adequate – fair to the nominee and adequate for us to prepare for the
hearing and Senate consideration. There is no reason to indulge in
needless and unreasonable delay. This is an historic nomination.
It should unite the American people and the Senate. Hers is a
distinctly American story. Whether you are from the South Bronx,
the South Side of Chicago or South Burlington, the American Dream
inspires all of us, and her life story IS the American Dream. And
so is the journey of the President who nominated her.
Some are simply
spoiling for a fight. There have been too many unfair attacks,
people unfairly calling her racist and bigoted. I know Sonia
Sotomayor, and nothing could be further from the truth. These are
some of the same people who vilify Justice Souter and Justice O’Connor.
Americans deserve better. There are others who have questioned her
character and temperament. She deserves a fair hearing, not trial
by partisan attack and assaults upon her character. Let us proceed to
give her that fair hearing without unnecessary delay.
I am also disappointed that some have taken to suggesting that after 17
years as a Federal judge, including 11 as a member of the United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, she does not understand “the
judge’s role.” I know her to be a restrained and thoughtful judge.
She has reportedly agreed with judges appointed by Republican presidents
95 percent of the time. Let us respect her achievements, her
experience and her understanding. Let no one demean this
extraordinary woman or her understanding of the constitutional duties
she has faithfully performed for the last 17 years. I urge all
Senators to join with me to fulfill our constitutional duties with
respect.
When I met with Judge Sotomayor last week I asked her about her approach
to the law. She answered that of course one’s life experience
shapes who you are, but “ultimately and completely”– and she used those
words – as a judge you follow the law. There is not one law for one race
or another, there is not one law for one color or another, there is not
one law for rich and a different one for poor. There is only one law.
She said ultimately and completely a judge has to follow the law no
matter what their upbringing has been. That is the kind of fair
and impartial judging that the American people expect. That is
respect for the rule of law. That is the kind of judge she has
been.
The purpose of the
hearing is to allow Senators to ask questions and raise their concerns.
It is also the time the American people can see the nominee, consider
her temperament and evaluate her character, too. I am disappointed
that some Republican Senators have declared that they will vote no on
this historic nomination and have made that announcement before giving
the nominee a fair chance to be heard at her hearing. It is
incumbent on us to allow the nominee an opportunity to be considered
fairly and allow her to respond to false criticism of her record and her
character. Those who are critical and have doubts should support
the promptest possibly hearing. That is where questions can be
asked and answered. That is why we hold hearings.
Judge Sotomayor is
extraordinarily well equipped to serve on the Nation’s highest court.
To borrow the phrase that the First Lady used last week, not only do I
believe that Judge Sotomayor is prepared to serve all Americans on the
Supreme Court, I believe that the country is “more than ready” to see
this accomplished Hispanic woman do just that. This historic
nomination is an occasion for the Senate and the Nation to come
together. This process also is another step toward the American people
regaining confidence in their judiciary. Our independent judiciary
is considered the envy of the world. Though less visible than the
other two Branches, the judiciary is a vital part of the infrastructure
that knits our Nation together under the rule of law. This
nomination keeps faith with the words engraved in Vermont marble over
the entrance of the Supreme Court: “Equal Justice Under Law.”
Her experience as a
trial court judge will be important. Only Justice Souter of those
currently on the Supreme Court previously served as a trial court judge.
She has the added benefit of having been in law enforcement as a tough
prosecutor who received her early training in the office of the longtime
and storied New York District Attorney, Robert Morgenthau.
I appreciate that she
has shown restraint as a judge. We do not need another Supreme
Court Justice intent on second-guessing Congress, undercutting laws
passed to benefit Americans and protect their liberties, and making
light of judicial precedent.
President Obama
handled the selection process with the care that the American people
expect and deserve, and met with Senators from both sides of the aisle.
Senator Sessions suggested to the President that it was important to
nominate someone with a judicial record. Judge Sotomayor has more
judicial experience than any nominee in recent history.
I wanted someone
outside the judicial monastery, and whose experiences were not limited
to those in the rarified air of the Federal appellate courts. Her
background as someone who was largely raised by a working mother in the
South Bronx, who has never forgotten where she came from, means a great
deal to me. Judge Sotomayor has a first-rate legal mind and
impeccable credentials. I think she combines the best of what
Senator Sessions and I recommended that the President look for in his
nominee.
The Supreme Court’s
decisions have a fundamental impact on Americans’ everyday lives.
One need look no further than the Lilly Ledbetter and Diana Levine cases
to understand how just one vote can determine the Court’s decision and
impact the lives and freedoms of countless Americans.
I believe Judge
Sotomayor will continue to do what she has always done as a judge –
applying the law to the case before her. I do not believe she will
act in the mold of conservative activists who second-guess Congress and
undercut laws meant to protect Americans from discrimination in their
jobs and in voting, to protect the access of Americans to health care
and education, and to protect their privacy from an overreaching
government.
I believe Judge
Sotomayor understands that the courthouse doors must be as open to
ordinary Americans as they are to government and big corporations.
President Obama is to
be commended for having consulted with Senators from both sides of the
aisle. Now the Senate’s duty comes to the fore. I hope that all
Senators now will work with me to move forward to consider this
nomination in a fair and timely manner.
# # # # #