A double standard on opposing minority nominees

Houston Chronicle:

Reflecting a wider dilemma for Senate Republicans, Texas Sen. John Cornyn on Tuesday tried walking a political tightrope to challenge a Supreme Court nominee put forward by a Democratic president without alienating Hispanic voters who could be key to a Republican comeback.

Cornyn, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and leads Senate GOP campaign efforts in 2010, seized a prominent role in Republican preparations to carefully question federal appeals court Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

President Barack Obama had barely finished announcing his selection of Sotomayor, 54, an 18-year veteran of the federal bench, before Cornyn called for a confirmation process that would “allow her to prove herself to possess the impartiality, integrity, legal expertise and judicial temperament” of a Supreme Court justice.

Cornyn is in “an especially delicate position” as he tries to position Senate Republicans for the upcoming debate over confirmation of the first Hispanic jurist to the Supreme Court, said Bruce Buchanan, a political scientist at University of Texas.

“The only consensus right now among Republicans is that the political opposition has to oppose,” Buchanan said. “But my suggestion would be to do so with caution and an eye on the reaction of constituents.”

...

Democrats did not have this concern when they opposed Miguel Estrada for the circuit court even though he was much more qualified that Sotomayer. They certainly did not have a problem in conducting their high tech lynching of Clarence Thomas.

I have seen enough of Sen. Cornyn to know that he will both respectful and insightful in his questioning of Sotomayer. He is a good lawyer and he knows how to do a tough cross examination without alienating the jury.

But Democrats and media need to also be careful about being patronizing to Sotomayer simply because of her ethnicity and gender. The fact is that it does not make her smarter than other candidates and she deserves the same tough questioning that all nominees for the court get these days.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more