GOP Senate leader endorses Sotomayor

[bemildred]

Source: USA Today

Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Tennessean who chairs the Republican Senate Conference, announced this morning that he will vote for President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, when she comes up for confirmation next week.

Alexander, seen at right, is the third-ranking Republican in the Senate leadership. He says he will back Sotomayor even though he believes her judicial and political philosophy is different from his.

"Courts were never intended to be political bodies composed of judges 'on your side' who would reliably tilt your way in controversial cases," he said in a speech this morning on the Senate floor. "Courts are supposed to do just the opposite: decide difficult cases with impartiality."

Alexander's announcement came hours after his Tennessee colleague, Republican Sen. Bob Corker, announced that he won't be backing Sotomayor. "I believe Judge Sotomayor views the Supreme Court as more of a policy-making body where laws are shaped based on the personal views of the justices," Corker said in a statement released by his office late Wednesday.

Read more: http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2009/07/68495761/1

[LeftishBrit]

1. Sounds encouraging. I hope she gets confirmed; she sounds good.

[bemildred]

2. This is all show biz, unless she poops on the floor in public, there is no chance she will not

be confirmed. She showed herself to be very circumspect in the hearings.

What I found interesting here is that some Republican politicians are finding it expedient to back her.

[frebrd]

4. "some Republican politicians are finding it expedient to back her"

I think they're "keeping their powder dry" for future use.

[bemildred]

6. That is the very definition of expediency. nt

[Arkana]

7. I'm pretty sure Roberts did that and he was confirmed.

[Ter]

9. She will be

By a landslide, too. Republicans always complain about "libera" SC Justices, yet always vote to confirm them (Ginsberg, Breyer). :)

[elocs]

3. With Republicans this is about future nominations as much as anything.

Although it does paint both them and Democrats into a corner with the notion that if a nominee is qualified, then they should be confirmed and not rejected just because of politics or leaning one way or the other. I am sure my own Senator Feingold will vote to confirm a nominee that he believes is qualified and that is why he pissed off so many here when he voted to confirm John Roberts. If a nominee is qualified, then that door has to swing both ways.

[usregimechange]

5. kick

[mr_liberal]

8. As others have already said, this is smart

if they support one of Obama's nominees, that's sure to get confirmed anyhow, then they can more easily oppose his next one when maybe they have more Republicans in the Senate (after the 2010 election). Id rather they oppose her.

I think they realize that, apart from her "wise Latina" comment, she actually seems like a fairly moderate judge too. Thats something I don't like about her. I have no idea how she's going to vote on civil liberties.

This is why Democrats should have supported Roberts though. Then we may have had a better chance to stop Alito. Miers should have been supported too, but thats another matter.