With confirmation almost a foregone conclusion, there’s one legitimate question that will be resolved during the Sotomayor confirmation process: Whether or not anyone still believes that a senator should determine their vote to confirm based solely on whether a nominee is qualified. It seems likely that the new criteria are “qualifications” and the nominee’s perceived ideology and likelihood to rule in particular direction.
Today we look at Ruth Bader Ginsburg getting 96 out of 100 votes and a 98–0 confirmation vote for Antonin Scalia and marvel. It was a different era; for many senators, philosophical or ideological differences with the nominee weren’t enough to justify a “no” vote; if he or she seemed qualified, you had to respect the president’s discretion and give them the benefit of the doubt.
Few bothered to argue that John Roberts and Samuel Alito were unqualified or insufficiently experienced to be on the court. But Roberts received 78 votes, Alito 58.
Campaign Spot reader Paul notes:
There are currently 25 Senators who have been in office since the Clarence Thomas hearings and vote. Richard Lugar is the only Republican (of the 8 Republicans, I still include Specter since he was a Republican when he voted) to have voted against a justice nominated by a Democratic President. (Interestingly, Lugar voted no on Breyer, yes on Ginsburg.)
Senators Akaka, Inouye, Harkin, Mikulski, Kennedy, Kerry and Reid, the “Hyper-Partisan 7″ I call them, voted nay on the 3 justices nominated by a Republican President (Thomas, Roberts and Alito). Only 3 of them (Inouye, Harkin and Reid) voted yea on Souter! If you throw out Souter’s vote, you will note that including the Thomas vote, justices nominated by Democratic Presidents receive an average of 6 nays while justices nominated by Republican Presidents garner an average of 37 nays, at least when it comes to long-serving members of ‘the world’s greatest deliberative body.’
During today’s opening statements, Sen. Orrin Hatch — who did not vote against any Supreme Court nominee — pointed out that Democrats are touting Sotomayor’s compelling life story, but they filibustered Miguel Estrada when he was nominated for the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. No less a figure than Barack Obama voted against Estrada, as well as against Justices Alito and Roberts.
It would probably be difficult to argue that Sotomayor isn’t qualified for the Supreme Court; she’s been in the legal world her entire adult life and has been a judge since 1992. Whether or not she would be a good justice is another question, and her statements and stances are likely to give many Republicans (and maybe a Democrat or two) reason to pause. Chances are, the days of the 98-0 confirmation vote are gone forever.