You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Sen. Leahy’ tag.

     The wise Latina woman appeared on Capitol Hill, and Sen. Leahy began the “dog and pony” show that is being choreographed for the benefit of the American public. But if this process is to be truly sincere, truly honest to the Constitution, then Sen. Lindsey Graham’s statement that “elections have consequences” is false. The young Sen. from Illinois, now the President, didn’t see it that way when he voted against the nomination of Chief Justice John Roberts, not on his record or his qualifications, but because he did not think that Roberts would have the empathy that would be needed to affect social justice.

        From “America’s Right”:

                Voting against the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor will take a wealth of political courage. Giving Sotomayor a rough time with regard to the plethora of reasons why she should not sit on the United States Supreme Court will take even more.

It would be relatively easy for a senator to explain to his or her constituents that he or she look forward to a day when they could vote in favor of confirming a nominee who is both Hispanic and qualified. Explaining why they relentlessly pointed out overt, repeated acts of racism and judicial activism on her part—not to mention the several occasions where her decisions, rooted in a stark dearth of intelligence, were overturned by the Supreme Court—would be slightly more difficult.

Here are my questions for the Hon. Sonia Sotomayor:

  1. Is a Hispanic female party more or less likely to bring a bona fide grievance before the Court than a white male party?
  2. If you were in my shoes, and Chief Justice John Roberts were to have said, on several occasions, that he has been able to come to a better decision because of his life experiences and his being a white male judge than, say, a Hispanic or black or Native American female judge could, how fit would you consider him to be objectively adjudicating matters where the legal and constitutional issue, rather than the parties, are of the utmost importance?
  3. Most of your decisions which have reached the Court at which you aspire to sit have been overturned or otherwise scrutinized for your failure to properly interpret the law. With no court to review the Supreme Court, should the American people be confident you’ll get it right?

For the full list and article:

     Sen. Leahy and Sen. McConnell met with the President today to discuss the Nominee to fill Justice David Souter’s seat on the US Supreme Court

     The short list includes Governor Grandholm of Michigan, Solicitor General nominee Elena Kagan,  and Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who favors judges doing some “legislating” from the bench. The “thorn” that sticks out off of the list is Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. Who is calling the shots at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue!!?

     From the moment that President Elect Barack Obama announced his appointment of Eric Holder to be Attorney General, there has been a flurry of dissent about the former Clinton appointee, and the controversies that have dogged him since the Clinton administration. As his confirmation hearings begin today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, his confirmation may not be off track completely, but the Republicans, and some Democrats, are not going to give Holder an easy ride through the process.

     Holder’s involvement in key problems in the Attorney General’s office during the Clinton era include:

  • The controversial pardon of fugitive financier Mark Rich, and questionable contributions from Rich’s ex-wife.
  • The pardons of the FLNA and some of the Weather Underground (the same group that Bill Ayers was involved with)
  • the decision to seize 6-year old Cuban refugee Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint from his uncle’s Miami home to return him to his father in Cuba
  • ties to embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich

     Judicial Watch has actively campaigned against the confirmation of Eric Holder, contacting the Senators, and taking out a full page advertisement to urge the same.

     In his opening remarks, Eric Holder used the story of Governor George Wallace’s refusal to permit Holder’s late sister-in-law admittance to college in Alabama during the civil rights movement, and then her actual admission to the University of Alabama. (If we are to rejoice in the election of Obama as a biracial President, is it not time that we cease using past history that will continue to create racial division). As the statements and the questioning has started, Holder has acknowledged some of his Clinton actions as possible mistakes, and he has also defined waterboarding as torture. (The Obama administration needs to tread lightly in that area, because our national security can be undermined with the utterance of a few misguided words).

      Sen. Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the committee, criticized both Holder and Sen. Leahy in his opening remarks, and basically guaranteed that this process was not going to be an easy one. Quipped one member of the Obama transition team “Hope you brought your dinner!!”

Related stories: