The much anticipated hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor commence before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Barry, I am hopeful the Senators will ask the tough questions about her view of the Constitution and her judicial philosophy.
The Senate has a constitutional role in providing advice and consent for nominees and it’s only appropriate that the Senators ask the in-depth questions about Judge Sotomayor’s view of the Constitution and her judicial philosophy.
There are serious questions about her judicial philosophy and I expect pertinent questions to be raised by members of the Committee - including Senators Jeff Sessions of Alabama and John Cornyn of Texas.
What does Judge Sotomayor believe is the proper role of judges? How does she view her role as a judge? These are important questions that deserve straight-forward answers. A Supreme Court appointment is the lasting legacy of a President. And, as President Obama moves to reshape the federal judiciary, it’s critical that the American people understand the judicial philosophy and temperament of Judge Sotomayor.
Let’s not forget the scope and intensity of questions posed to President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees – John Roberts and Samuel Alito. The questioning of Judge Sotomayor must be direct, focused and in-depth. The nominee must answer the questions clearly and without reservation. The American people deserve nothing less.
To subscribe to “Lynn v. Sekulow” click here.
posted July 13, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Why, Jay? Judge Sotomayor already has a track record of hundreds of decisions, already making her mor competent than ANY of the recent Bush or Reagan nominees — even including their experience on the Supreme Court!
posted July 13, 2009 at 10:16 pm
http://www.discoveringjesusfishing.net
In order for the Senate to do their duty of advice and consent, indeed, they must ask the tough questions. In the inception of the Lynn v. Sekulow blog, several posts were written about various presidential candidacy forums where candidates would be interrogated about their positions and philosophies about various issues pertinent to the presidency. I view the confirmations as a microcosm of the presidential process. Since all three branches are distinct but have equal powers, I do not mean to indicate that the hearings are any less important, but are on the same level and should be given the proper attention. Difficult questions need to be asked from both sides to find out the truth since the appointed candidate will have a huge impact on judicial decisions because of a lifetime appointment. Hopefully Judge Sotomayor, or any candidate for that matter, will not be allowed to nonchalantly take a stroll through the park.