Sotomayer Is Not A Hill To Die On

When everyone knows you are going to lose, they are going to watch how you lose: Republicans need to think hard about their objectives with Sotomayor’s SCOTUS nomination.

I got an email from Human Events awhile back that I wish I’d saved. The headlines basically screamed “Liberal President and Liberal Congress Will Appoint Liberal To Supreme Court To Advance Liberal Agenda!!!!” My response was “Duh.” Not exactly the running for my checkbook and the RNC’s address they were hoping for.

Of course Obama is appointing a liberal to advance a liberal agenda. That’s what the majority of Americans elected him and a Democrat majority to do. I’m not happy about it but how can we be surprised or even mad about this?

In fact, as with the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies, I am actually surprised that Obama did not go farther to the left than he has. I read the “wise latina” comment context and even to me it seemed like she was just saying that people with different backgrounds will approach things differently and this seems true to me as long as laws are made and interpreted by people.

Also let’s not forget that “special” rights for minorities are an article of faith among white liberals, especially on the mean green left, so the fears of racism on her part seem overblown to me and secondary to her just being a liberal.

Try googling “is Sotomayor a trap for republicans” and see what pops up. If you want to pick two groups that Republicans don’t need to piss off any more, they are women and Hispanics and the trap is set for Republicans to immolate themselves with both groups and still fail!

Even better, any serious effort to keep Sotomayor from being confirmed is going to take a filibuster, which will of course be exactly what Republicans complained about for years. The Main Stream Media will run relentlessly with the hypocrisy angle and probably rightfully so.

One option is to just try and debate judicial philosophy with her but to what end? She will probably “ginsburg” and just not answer any questions: that’s the only smart option for her, as it was for the last few Republican nominees and will be for whoever comes next.

There is, however, another option: ask her about the nomination process. In particular, ask her opinions about the treatment of Miguel Estrada, who George W. Bush tried to get into a key judgeship and who was harassed and filibustered for two years until he just gave up and withdrew.

Have Sotomayer comment on whether or not denying him an up or down vote was fair. Ask for her comments on how a Latino nominee who was declared “well-qualified” by the liberal American Bar Association was somehow painted as an extreme right winger, too dangerous to be allowed to be even voted on, never mind confirmed. Oh, and ask her about ABC reporter Michael Martin’s comment that Estrada was an affirmative action appointment.

Then go on to discuss the other Bush nominees that the Democrats stonewalled especially women such as Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown. Just don’t talk about Harriet Meyers.

Two things are possible in this nomination battle:

1. Republicans can co-opt the sex/race issues by bringing up the way Republican Latino and female nominees were treated. Even if Sotomayer refuses to say anything, the cases will be back in the news and the Democrats will have some explaining to do.
2. Republicans can position for that day when, if they aren’t replaced by some third party we haven’t seen yet, they actually get to nominate some judges. Not that I think the Democrats will suddenly play fair, they would not, but at least the Republicans could get some moral high ground, real estate they haven’t seen for awhile.