So far, Sotomayor has stayed completely in control even as the Judiciary Committee's 19 members alternately tried to shake and support her. Nowhere has her self-command been more evident than in her refusal — despite repeated efforts by Republicans and Democrats alike — to offer hints about her thinking on the nation's most politically sensitive disputes.
On abortion, Second Amendment rights, voting rights and more, Sotomayor consistently has steered clear of hinting how she might rule. In part, she refuses to pre-judge a specific case she might see again...
Sotomayor's ruling with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold New York state's ban on the joined-sticks weapon called nunchaku, likewise, drew question after question about whether she thinks the Second Amendment applies to states. She frustrated them all, insisting the state issue might yet come before the high court.
This is one of the things that drives me nuts about the whole confirmation process. She doesn't comment on issues that might come before the court because she can't. The Rules of Judicial Conduct are quite explicit on this point. She can't talk about it, AND EVERYONE BLOODY WELL KNOWS IT. So there's no point in asking the questions on these issues other than grandstanding.
This whole damn "Advise and Consent" process has been turned by both sides into one long political commercial. I'd love to see rules in place that say that all questions must be that: questions. No endless "opening statements", no long rambling preludes, get to your point in 150 words or less or STFU.
I know 'll never see that. Because the worst offenders are the people who make the rules.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Despite tough questioning, Sotomayor remains unruffled: McClatchy
Posted by JD Rhoades at Thursday, July 16, 2009