Posted on 07/28/2009 9:17:42 AM PDT by MaestroLC
Along largely partisan lines, the Senate Judiciary Cmte backed SCOTUS appointee Sonia Sotomayor, Pres. Obama's first high court pick, this morning by a 13-6 vote.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was the only Republican to support Sotomayor. The Senate cmte's Dems voted unanimously for the Bronx native.
The full Senate will vote next, but with the Dems' 60-vote majority, Sotomayor's confirmation is all but a done deal. She will be the first individual of Hispanic heritage to sit on the SCOTUS.
Yep, he always does.
Nam Vet
see my post #19
I think Miss Lindsay meets lots of men in dark alleys.
It takes at least one republican to move this vote to the floor.
He just gave them his vote and I think he has 5.5 years to go before he is up for re-election.
RINO’s I’m sure McCain and Bush would say this POS is a good conservative.
How is that? Roberts was already on the court...
Lindsey has been off the reservation for awhile now. He must really like being the only pubby on the inide the beltway cocktail party invitation list.
I had such high hopes for Graham during Clinton’s impeachment hearings...what a disappointment he has become.
lol
Swell.
The link in Dorf's post is to Congress Matters, which has the Senate Judiciary Committee rule:
IV. BRINGING A MATTER TO A VOTE The Chairman shall entertain a non-debatable motion to bring a matter before the Committee to a vote. If there is objection to bring the matter to a vote without further debate, a roll call vote of the Committee shall be taken, and debate shall be terminated if the motion to bring the matter to a vote without further debate passes with ten votes in the affirmative, one of which must be cast by the minority.
She rejected the president's "empathy standard," abandoned her statements that a judge's "opinions, sympathies and prejudices" may guide decision-making, dismissed remarks that personal experiences should "affect the facts that judges choose to see," brushed aside her repeated "wise Latina" comment as "a rhetorical flourish," and championed judicial restraint.
Judge Sotomayor's attempt to rebrand her previously stated judicial approach was, as one editorial page opined, "uncomfortably close to disingenuous."
Why not defend the philosophy she had articulated so carefully over the years?
I have read the same thing! His vote released it from Committee. Figures!
Okay, maybe I garbled the sequence. The Myers withdrawal got us Alito.
No, he already won reelection after beating his conservative opponent in an open primary. I think you can figure it out. Of course having ensconced connections and alot of money helps.
Jeff Sessions, citing “judicial activism,” says he’ll vote no on Sonia Sotomayor
Press Register | July 27, 2009 11:46 AM | Sean Reilly
Posted on 07/27/2009 10:23:49 AM PDT by SonnyBubba
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2302087/posts
Senate Panel OKs Sotomayor for Court (Poll at source)
AOL | 7/28/09 | JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS
Posted on 07/28/2009 9:30:59 AM PDT by xtinct
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2302848/posts
Her main reason for getting on the court is her radical left-wing agenda.
Her race got her on the court because of quotas and allows overlooking ability.
Graham “pro choice” and he showed it
Can we find some proof of this? I've heard it a number of times too, but never in any official capacity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.