Baucus Hints at Sotomayor Opposition
UPDATE: That Was Fast, Baucus Now Says "Si"

Does he actually intend to vote against confirming Judge Sotomayor? I doubt it. Is this really about his fight over healthcare? I think so.

Still, it emphasizes once again that if the Senate Republicans hadn't been hiding under their desks for the first six weeks after Sotomayor's nomination, we might have derailed it--or at least given the President a black eye.

[Sen. Max] Baucus on Thursday twice told The Hill he is undecided on next week’s floor vote on Sotomayor.

“I have no idea,” Baucus said. “I haven’t paid any attention and I haven’t announced … I’ve been so busy with healthcare. It’s under consideration. I’ll certainly know when I vote, but right now I can’t tell you.”

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has come out against Sotomayor, stating it will factor the vote into its legislative scorecard because the group feels the nominee would curb gun rights.

Baucus had an A rating from the NRA in 2008, as did two other Senate Democrats who ran last year: Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Mark Warner of Virginia.

Johnson supports Sotomayor’s nomination.

No senator should be supporting the nomination of a judge with such a long history of race- and gender- bias. Her belief in racial and gender superiority--not mere difference, but superiority of some over others--is fundamentally at odds with the role of the judiciary. Her disregard for the Code of Judicial Conduct when she joined a woman-only club demonstrates an over-casual treatment of the ethics obligations of the judiciary. Finally, her shoddy work behind the bench on important constitutional issues in cases like Ricci and Didden suggest that she's just not up to the task of being a Supreme Court justice.

So, of course, she's going to get overwhelming support from the Senate when they vote next week.

UPDATE (10:24am): Via DrewM., Baucus has now announced that he will vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor:

"I have long said that to be a Supreme Court Justice a person must meet three main criteria: personal integrity [even though she transparently lied to Senate Judiciary], professional competence [erm, Ricci much?], and a view of important issues that is within the mainstream of contemporary judicial thought. [race- and gender- bias is within the mainstream of judicial thought? Aye de mi!]"

Pressure was appropriately applied.

posted by Gabriel Malor at 01:00 PM

| Access Comments