Earlier, Senator Orrin Hatch spent a great deal of time grilling Sotomayor on whether the right to bear arms was a "fundamental right" before moving on to Ricci. Hatch repeated the conservative canard that "all nine of them disagreed with your handling" of the Ricci case (Feinstein later pointed out that Ginsburg wrote that the Second Circuit court decision should have been affirmed) before adding a dash of white male populism: "People are tired of courts imposing their will against one group or another," said Hatch.
One of the chosen methods of mitigating the GOP's approach on Ricci has been to invoke the opinion of Judge Jose Cabranes, who dissented from the Second Circuit's per curiam ruling. Hatch used Cabranes' views to argue against the majority's decision in that case, with considerably more skill than his colleague Jeff Sessions.
Sessions, when bringing up Cabranes, noted that Cabranes is “also a Hispanic judge on the court” before noting, ”You could have agreed with him, but you didn't.” What an odd statement -- Sessions spent a great deal of time attacking Sotomayor for letting race affect her rulings, before asking why she didn't do that in this instance!
Hatch concluded by alluding to the alleged "smear campaign" against Frank Ricci. "People for the American Way has been smearing Frank Ricci because he may be willing to be a witness in these proceedings. I know you have nothing to do with it, don't think I'm trying to make a point against you -- I'm not -- I'm trying to say that's the kind of thing that doesn't belong in Supreme Court hearings," Hatch said.
"Absolutely, Senator," agreed Sotomayor, calling it "reprehensible." One wonders if Hatch has similarly strong feelings about say, Rush Limbaugh or Pat Buchanan.
-- A. Serwer
