Update: Whitehouse, Sotomayor discuss her demeanor
12:50 PM Wed, Jun 03, 2009 | Permalink
Email
 |
 |
Projo 7 to 7 News BlogTaking the news pulse of Rhode Island and Southeastern Massachusetts, by Providence Journal and projo.com staff, from 7 to 7, every business day |
|
Get the 7 to 7 on your mobile at www.projo.com. Twitter: projo | RSS | Email alerts
« RI issues warning on gamefish consumption |
Main
| Two more Rhode Island swine flu cases; one hospitalized »
By John E. Mulligan
Whitehouse, who is practically certain to support Sotomayor when the Senate Judiciary Committee examines her fitness to serve on the Supreme Court, said he questioned her directly about her demeanor on the bench because her assertive style of questioning lawyers has been ``misconstrued'' by critics to suggest that ``she is either impolite or uncivil.'' Rather, said Whitehouse, Sotomayor likes what lawyers call the ``hot bench,'' which he described as a judicial style of getting at the essential issues of a case by quizzing the attorneys who argue it. Lawyer Whitehouse said that when he argued cases in appeals courts, he appreciated a hot bench, because it gave a sense of where the judge was coming from and helped to expose the weaknesses in a legal argument. Whitehouse and Sotomayor, each accompanied by two aides, met for roughly half an hour in his office on Wednesday - the New York judge's second full day of courtesy calls on Senate leaders and members of the Judiciary Committee, which will hold hearings and then vote on whether to recommend that the full senate confirm her nomination to the Supreme Court. There has been harsh criticism of Sotomayor by some conservatives since President Obama nominated her last week to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter. But during an interview after his private meeting with Sotomayor, Whitehouse expressed doubt that his Republican colleagues would indulge in attacks on her that fall out of bounds. ``Most things are fair game in this process,'' Whitehouse said when he was asked about the partisan exaggeration that has often marked the debate over presidential nominations to the federal courts. Exaggeration to make a point is within bounds, said Whitehouse, who used strong language to criticize judicial nominations by President George W. Bush. But Whitehouse added, ``It is important not to confuse things that ought not to be confused.'' Thus, he argued, Sotomayor's tough questioning from the ``hot bench'' should not be confused with an uncivil judicial temperament. When Bush nominated a Republican judge to the federal appeals court in Boston in 2007, Whitehouse charged that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. both violated pledges to honor judicial precedent that they had made during their Senate confirmation hearings. After Bush nominated U.S. District Court William E. Smith to the appeals court, Whitehouse said, ``You've got to make sure that the guy's not a stalking horse for Bush ideology.'' Democrats never scheduled hearings on Smith's nomination, so it died when Mr. Obama took office.
CommentsLeave a commentPlease be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published. Name and email are required; email address will not publish. |
Tags 
New comments
New photos
New posts
Projo blogs
Archives
Whitehouse is such a waste...this guy is clueless, He thinks he's at a Carnival, Only problem is we are all paying for it....
Report Abuse
Is John Mulligan serious; "practically certain to support Sotomayer" give me a break. Sen. Outhouse will vote whatever way his Democratic overlords tell him to do. It is interesting to see the lovefest extend beyond their beloved Messiah President to Ms. Sotomayer. One question to the righteous members of the Democratic majority; will you apply the same rigourous questioning of Ms. Sotomayer's controversial commments that you would have had the candidate been nominated by a Republican? You don't have to reply because we all know the answer, absolutley not.
We're witnessing the height of hypocrisy wherein Ms. Sotomayer will be forgiven ANY transgression because of her background yet nominees such as SC Judges Roberts and Alito were grilled ad nauseum because they held pro-life view points. There sin, being white males. Welcome to the new order.
Report Abuse
Whatever the candidate's merit, it is distressing that she has to pass muster before the quintessential empty blazer, Whitehouse. I continue to rue the vacuum that saw him get elected to the senate and take some small comfort in the fact that his automaticity is diluted by the other 99 senators. At least he is not a state official any longer. His legacy: failure to prosecute Urciuoli, failure to understand lead poisoning or the law, failure to protect Rivera, failure....and, of course, his nomination of McConnell as compensation for "Jack's" campaign contributions and losses at the lead paint trial.
Report Abuse
This Whitehouse clown has GOT to go! He gave full support for this racist Judge before he even spoke to her or looked into her background. When Obama says "jump Whitehouse" he only asks "How High". how about off the Newport Bridge!
Report Abuse
Was this discussion in English or Spainish? If in English, did Whitehouse have to press 1 or 2?
Report Abuse
In reference to the comment from Dave, hey, that was good ;)
Report Abuse
With the Whitehouse coaching judge Sotomayor not to respond publically to any questions, how is the general public going to learn anything about her? It's the Journalists' job to vette the judge and it's the judge's responsibility to respond to those questions honestly and candidly. It feels like the Whitehouse does not trust her "Loose Lips" and wants time to prepare her responses and for her to practice them..... Not quite the process we should be encouraging for someone who could change the way we live in this counrty.
You decide!
Report Abuse