Step right up to see the real freaks on C-SPAN, folks! (Via def110 @ Flickr.)
So! This morning at 10 a.m. sharp, the Senate Judiciary committee will open the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Sonia Sotomayor. I don’t know about you, but I’m kinda excited.
H.L. Mencken (who was no friend to women, mind) once said that, “I confess I enjoy democracy immensely. It is incomparably idiotic, and hence incomparably amusing.” This more or less sums up the reasons why I am such a nerd for this sort of show, which ideally I should stay away from for my own mental health. But it’s too funny! Nothing entertains me more than people who take themselves so unbelievably seriously that they begin spouting pompous nonsense in hopes of making the evening news.
And thank God for the comedy, because it’s not like there’s any suspense here. As Dahlia Lithwick notes, there is little doubt that Sotomayor will be confirmed. I haven’t, in fact, said much about the nomination in this forum or any other because I cannot say that my heart swells with music at the prospect of Sotomayor on the court. I am perfectly thrilled that she is a woman and that she is Hispanic. But I am a bit old-fashioned on questions of good judging in the sense that I really think a Supreme Court ought to be a place for brilliant, iconoclastic jurists (which is why though I try I can’t totally hate Nino) and if Sotomayor is one of these, her decisions to date don’t much show it, in my admittedly limited opinion. (I know! I know! I am not the arbiter of what is smart and what isn’t. But it’s what I think.) And I think that Obama should have gone for gold instead of this choice, given his strong control of the Senate and given how many crazy cases may get before the court in the next few years before one of the conservatives drops dead and we have ourselves a real fight.
But on the upside, the fact that Sotomayor is so uncontroversial means that we may be assured that the objections to her are going to be utterly delicious peanut-brittle clusters of C-SPAN nutbarity. Highlights to include:
- Arlen Specter asking her questions about procedural law that the commentators are probably not going to really understand. He seems to have a bee in his bonnet about the Justices getting whole summers off when other Federal employees work 11 months of the year. So he proposes that they change the number of judges needed to agree to hear a case from four to TWO. If implemented, this will make the court’s docket look like my fourteen-year-old cousin’s Twitter account. Any two conservative judges will be able to unilaterally make the Court hear every nutcase who has filed a conservative lawsuit in the last two years. Bad idea, Specter.
- I expect several uses of the term “reverse racism” – if not in questions to Sotomayor herself, then by the minority witnesses, who include Frank Ricci, the plaintiff in the recent Connecticut firefighters case.
- Gun crazies are out in force on the minority witness list as well, so we can bet they’ll be whining that Sotomayor could actually ban their assault rifles. The horror! The horror!
Are any of you gonna be glued to the C-SPAN live feed the way I am?
ug! I wish I wasn’t about to be slammed all morning. Although I will say, anytime I pay prolonged attention to members of Congress actually “work” I come away feeling angry and dirty.
Can’t watch TV but hoping the NYT will liveblog. I’m looking forward to Ricci’s testimony, since it came out in the MSM last week that he’s pretty litigious. I hope one of the Dem senators asks him why he was more than happy to take advantage of the ADA to get his job (apparently he’s dyslexic) but screams “reverse discrimination” when he loses out.
Jeff Sessions (R, AL) is very opposed to Sotomayor. I live in AL and have had correspondence with him on some issues. He is very misogynistic and racist. He has been working behind the scene to oppose her as he is very much anti-choice. He will do anything to keep out someone who is pro-woman. He should not be heading the Judiciary Committee because of his extreme right-wing and Religious Reich agendas.
Maritsa: Duh, because those laws were written only for the personal benefit of Frank Ricci, and when Frank Ricci is not personally benefited by these laws, they are bad laws.
This is an interesting time in which to be reading my dad’s copy of “Supreme Courtship” by Christopher Buckley. It’s supposed to be satire, but it’s really not looking too far off these days….
I might just do a drinking game. Every time “reverse racism” comes up, I’ll do a shot of Frappuccino.
I really don’t know if I can deal with this; I almost had a conniption listening to the Sunday shows on the radio while driving around yesterday. What kills me is not the shameless racism of the Republicans but the spineless, pathetic response from Dems. “She misspoke!” “She’s very moderate, really!” How about SOMEONE, ANYONE just admitting that EVERYONE has a race, yes even white people!!! and that it ALWAYS affects decision making? Is it just me or has our legal understanding of racism slipped backwards a fucking century???
EXACTLY, Maritza!!!!
I also love how republicans are sort of insinuating that because 5 of 9 judges decided to rewrite the law after Ricci, that it “proves” Sotomayor is an inferior jurist.
PS, I have to disagree with you, I am not a screaming fan of Sotomayor’s (because what is there to scream about really?) but I think the level of intellect necessary to write and decide good Sup Ct opinions is not particularly high. I am perfectly ok with a medium smart liberal with a common touch up there.
@JD: have an honest discussion about race and class? I want whatever drugs you’re taking.
@PS: I feel you re: “go for the gold” I was actually pretty disappointed by this pick initially for exactly that reason. But I’ve made my peace with it…somewhat.
No C-SPAN, but I’m listening to NPR and Sessions is transparently racist and partisan and aggressively assy.
And the day that someone who isn’t on a progressive/feminist blog points out that white men are just as raced and sexed as latinas is the day I will, like Dickens’ Mr. Grimwig, “eat my head.”
Sessions seriously hates Latinos. He hates them, I’m not kidding. His immigration legislation a couple years ago tried to criminalize people who give SERVICES to undocumented immigrants. He thinks they haven’t “assimilated” as well as other immigrant groups.
There was already some kind of outburst – did anyone hear what dude was yelling?
Sarah of a Lesser God, I hope you bought like three ventis, cause you’re going to need ‘em.
J.D., what do you mean? Everyone knows that “white straight male” is the default setting for humankind, and any variation thereof who thinks their viewpoint matters is OMG playing identity politics!!! I want SOMEONE to PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE bring up the Alito quote about how his family’s immigrant background affects his jurisprudence. Please. I would die happy.
How about long quotes from Clarence Thomas’ autobiography which blames his entire personality and jurisprudence on white people making him feel inferior by applying affirmative action to him?
poor Clarence.
Man, I hate legislators.
Sotomayor has a facial expression on that I worry will be fodder for the news networks.
“judicial blindfold” my ass.
i don’t have a TV PS, will they call it “sassy?”
No, more like “dismayed.” She looks upset.
JD, get thee to the NPR livestream!
@PSoul – Apparently the guy yelling was an anti-abortion protester (“Abortion is murder!” etc.) who was promptly escorted out. Cf. the scotusblog’s liveblogging.
all that shit is blocked from my work computers.
C-SPAN is blocked at your work? Jeepers.
any video and audio. which is really dumb because we use video and audio ALL THE TIME. i need to talk to someone about this actually.
“Man, I hate legislators”
see?