Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Alabama
for his kind comments. As he knows, I made similar comments about him this
morning in the Senate Judiciary Committee. I reiterate them here today.
We did decide, both Senator Sessions and I, at the beginning of this process
that we would try to make sure everybody was heard. We may have different
outcomes on how everybody would vote, but everybody was heard. That has been
done. I compliment the leaders of the Senate for doing that.
We are about to conclude Senate consideration of this nominee. I thank those
Senators who evaluated this nomination fairly. I thank especially those
Republican Senators who have shown the independence to join the bipartisan
confirmation of this historic nomination. I thank all Senators on both sides
of the aisle who spent hours and hours and days and days in our hearings.
Some critics have attacked President Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia
Sotomayor by contending he picked her for the Supreme Court to substitute
empathy for the rule of
law. These critics are wrong about the President; they are wrong about Sonia
Sotomayor.
Let's leave out the rhetoric and go to the facts. When the President
announced his choice of Judge Sotomayor 10 weeks ago, he focused on the
qualities he sought in a nominee. He started with ``rigorous intellect'' and
``a mastery of the law.''
He then referred to recognition of the limits of the judicial role when he
talked about ``an understanding that a judge's job is to interpret, not
make, law; to approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda,
but rather a commitment to impartial justice; a respect for precedent, and a
determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand.'' That is
what President Obama said.
Then he went on to mention experience. He said:
Experience being tested by obstacles and barriers, by hardship and
misfortune; experience insisting, persisting, and ultimately overcoming
those barriers. It is experience that can give a person a common touch and a
sense of compassion; an understanding of how the world works and how
ordinary people live. And that is why it is a necessary ingredient in the
kind of justice we need on the Supreme Court.
Then the President concluded by discussing how Judge Sotomayor has all these
qualities. The President was looking not just for lawyerly ability, but for
wisdom--for an understanding of how the law and justice work in the everyday
lives of Americans.
In a subsequent radio and Internet address, the President reiterated the
point when he said:
As a Justice of the Supreme Court, she will bring not only the experience
acquired over the course of a brilliant legal career, but the wisdom
accumulated over the course of an extraordinary journey--a journey defined
by hard work, fierce intelligence, and the enduring faith that, in America,
all things are possible.
President Obama did not say that he viewed compassion or sympathy as a
substitute for the rule of law. In fact, he has never said he would
substitute empathy for
the rule of law. That is a false choice. The opposition to this nomination
is based on a false premise.
When she was first named, Judge Sotomayor said: ``I firmly believe in the
rule of law as a foundation for all our basic rights.'' Judge Sotomayor
reiterated time and time again during her confirmation hearing her fidelity
to the rule of law. She said:
Judges can't rely on what's in their heart. They don't determine the law.
Congress makes the laws. The job of the judge is to apply the law. And so
it's not the heart that compels conclusions in cases. It's the law. The
judge applies the law to the facts before that judge.
Those who, after 4 days of hearing, would ignore her testimony, should at
least take heed of her record as a judge. Judge Sotomayor has demonstrated
her fairness and impartiality during her 17 years as a judge. She has
followed the law. There is no record of her substituting her personal views
for the law. The many independent studies that have closely examined Judge
Sotomayor's record have concluded it is a record of applying the law, not
bias.
What she has said, and what we should all acknowledge, is the value her
background brings to her as a judge and would bring to her as a Justice, our
first Latina Justice.
Judge Sotomayor is certainly not the first nominee to discuss how her
background has shaped her character. Justice O'Connor has acknowledged, ``We
are all creatures of our upbringing. We bring whatever we are as people to a
job like the Supreme Court.'' Everybody knows that, just as all 100 of us
bring who we are to the Senate.
Many recent Justices have spoken of their
life experiences as influential factors in how they approach the bench.
Justice Alito and Justice Thomas, nominated by Republican
Presidents, did so famously at their confirmation hearings, and then they
were praised by the Republican side of the aisle for doing so. Indeed, when
the first President Bush nominated Justice Thomas to the Supreme Court, he
touted him as an ``intelligent person who has great
empathy.''
Some of those choosing to oppose this historic nomination have tried to
justify their opposition by falsely contending that President Obama is
pitting empathy
against the rule of law. Not so. Not so. This President and this nominee are
committed to the rule of law. They recognize the role of life experience not
as a substitute for the law or in conflict with its mandates, but as
informing judgment.
What is really at play is not a new Obama ``empathy
standard'' with respect to judicial selection, but a double standard being
applied by those who supported the nominations of Justice
Alito and Justice
Thomas.
Judge Sotomayor's career and judicial record demonstrate that she has always
followed the rule of law. The point is, we don't have to guess at what kind
of a judge she has been. She has had more experience on the Federal court,
both trial level and appellate level, than any nominee in decades. She will
be the only member of the U.S. Supreme Court with experience as a trial
judge. We don't have to guess. There are well over 3,000 cases, so we don't
have to guess. Attempts at distorting that record
by suggesting that her ethnicity or her heritage would be the driving force
in her decisions as a Justice of the Supreme Court are demeaning to women
and all communities of color.
I have spoken over the last several years about urging Presidents from both
political parties to nominate someone from outside the ``judicial
monastery.'' I believe that experience, perspective, an understanding of how
the world works and people live, and the effect decisions will have on the
lives of people are very important qualifications. By striving for a more
diverse bench drawn from judges with a wider set of backgrounds and
experiences we can better ensure there will be no prejudices
and biases controlling our courts of justice. All nominees have talked about
the value they will draw on the bench from their backgrounds. That diversity
of experience and strength is not a weakness in achieving an impartial
judiciary.
I have voted on every member of the current U.S. Supreme Court. I have
participated in the hearings of all but one of them, and that one I voted on
the nomination having watched the hearing. I have sat in on the hearings of
Justices no longer there, either because of retirement or death. I have
conducted hundreds of nomination hearings--everything from courts of appeals
judges, Federal district court judges, and Department of Justice appointees.
I have been ranking member on two Supreme Court
nominations and conducted this one. I mention that to thank the Senator from
Alabama for his cooperation during it.
After those hundreds of hearings, you get a sense of the person you are
listening to. I met for hours with Judge Sotomayor, either in the hearing
room or privately. You learn who a person is, you really do, in asking these
kinds of questions. You have to bring your own experience and your own
knowledge to [Page: S8943]
what you are hearing. There are only 101 people in this great Nation of 300
million people who get a say as to who is going to be one of the nine
members
of the U.S. Supreme Court. First and foremost, it is the President who makes
the nomination, but then the 100 of us in the U.S. Senate who must follow
our own conscience, our own experience, our own abilities in deciding
whether we will advise and consent to that nomination. It is an awesome
responsibility, and we should do it not because we are swayed by any special
interest group of either the right or the left.
In fact, I have a rule--my office knows it very well--that in Supreme Court
confirmations I will not meet with groups on either the right or the left
about it. I will make up my mind through those hours and days and the
transcripts of the hearing. I would urge all Senators to do that. I think it
is unfortunate if any Senator of either party were to make up their mind on
a Supreme Court nominee based on pressure from special interest groups from
either the right or the left. That is a disfavor
to those hundreds of millions of Americans who don't belong to pressure
groups of either the right or the left. They expect us to stand up.
That is what we should do on Judge Sotomayor. This is an extraordinary
nominee. I remember when President Obama called me a few hours before he
nominated her. I was with our troops in Afghanistan, and he explained what
he was going to do in a few hours. We talked about that and we talked about
Afghanistan, but we talked especially about her. He said, you know, there
are Web sites already developing opposed to her. And within hours, we had
leaders calling her racist, bigoted, or being affiliated
with a group akin to the Ku Klux Klan. Fortunately, Senators on neither side
joined with that.
We are almost at a time for a vote. I would hope every Senator would search
his or her conscience and ask whether they are voting for this nominee based
on their oath of office, based on their conscience, or are they reflecting a
special interest group.
When the Judiciary Committee began the confirmation hearings on this Supreme
Court nomination, and when the Senate this week began its debate, I
recounted an insight from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., which is often quoted
by President Obama. ``Let us realize the arc of the moral universe is long,
but it bends toward justice.''
It is distinctly American to continually refine our Union, moving us closer
to our ideals. Our union is not yet perfected, but with this confirmation,
we will be making progress.
Years from now, we will remember this time when we crossed paths with the
quintessentially American journey of Sonia Sotomayor and when our Nation
took another step forward through this historic confirmation process. I urge
each Senator to honor our oath, our Constitution, and our national promise
by voting his or her conscience on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to
serve as a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. I will proudly vote for her.
Mr. President, I see the Republican leader is here, and I will reserve the
remainder of my time. |